I was a gospel doctrine teacher back in the day. It was 2013 or 2014. It was the D&C year. At any rate, this guy moved into our ward and was in my class. I remember that he kept raising his hand to offer insights or corrections, or to elaborate on this or that thing. I was utterly transfixed. I wanted to cancel the class, and just sit and ask him 1,000,001 questions. Obviously it was Dan Bradley, who moved into our ward. He’s easily one of the most insightful and intelligent church historians that I’ve ever known. And very sincere and heartfelt. Dude is 100% legit.
Great job, guys! I'm a convert to the LDS church, having joined over 40 years ago in my 20s. I just recently discovered your channel and have been watching a lot of your videos!
I came to the same conclusion long ago but as a result of reading Wilford Woodruff's Witness by Jennifer Mackley. She explains that until Wilford Woodruff people were sealed into priesthood lines, not as families. When we realize this reality, suddenly polyandry makes sense. If they believed that exaltation was only possible for those who were sealed in an eternal marriage, who better to be sealed to than the Prophet? Joseph Smith was an imperfect man, no doubt. But he was an honest man. The historical record and church doctrine at the time simply DO NOT support the idea he practiced polygamy for sexually opportunistic reasons. And it's past time people just come to grips with that. One might say he wasn't a prophet. Unbelievers might even say he was deceived. But a dishonest charlatan he was not.
I've always maintained that the "sealings" that were done in those days were innocently done by those who were brand new to the sealing power and principle. We live now with over 170 years of experience with the sealing power. It was brand new to them and they were just learning about it.
Why wasn’t Emma Smith the first sealing then? A “prophet “ of God can’t even get sealed to his actual wife first? He decided to hide his other sealings from her. Wasn’t Emma like the 18th sealing instead of the first? How could you do that to your wife?
@@Eagle_Powers That's all between Joseph and Emma. It's their marriage, not yours. It's none of our business how they worked that out. It's also not appropriate for us in 2023 to judge how they used the sealing power back then because we are now operating with over 170 years of experience, clarifications, and understanding. It was new to them and they had to learn.
@@Eagle_Powers, perhaps because she did not support him being sealed to anyone else, and so she told him IF he did follow through with other women, she would NOT be sealed to him. 17 wives later, she came around. There are so many possible scenarios and we just can’t read into them all.
@@onandagus1Another question Don😊. I would LOVE to know your thoughts on the heavenly signs- the night Joseph picked up the plates. The army in the sky? That's one of my favorite stories🤍
@@StompMom5 That one intrigues me too. I've explored it a little but really need to explore it more. If the subject Joseph Smith and heavenly signs interests you, we need to stay in touch. While I haven't yet very fully covered the army in the sky, I've explored this subject *quite a bit* in other cases and have found some mind-blowing stuff! 😁
@@onandagus1 Quick question, do we have any of Joseph's journals, diaries, or letters on the topic of his polygamy (plural marriage) and his feelings towards it? I once saw a video done by a member where he said Joseph had written a symbol meaning "hell" in his journal on a particular day when he and Emma were having a heated disagreement about the issue. Is there any validity to this story or any written testimony from Joseph on the matter, short of the historical inference that he seemed to delay the practice due to his desire not to practice it out of revulsion or fear? Thanks!
"crap"??? LOL. Do did you hear Don mention how many of Joseph's Adult wives WERE NOT PREGNANT??? ALL of the Young Girls Joseph Married were not pregnant either.
@@vendingdudes I agree! But Jeremy will just update it again and again with more 3rd and 4th hand sources lol Jeremy's gotta keep those donations coming in somehow
I can’t tell you how much I have enjoyed Don being on your program. To say this is fantastic is an understatement. I’m going to share this one with a dear friend who is an active faithful member, but thought the drawn sword was a lie. He will love this. Thank you!
SIXTEEN THOUSAND SUBSCRIBERS!!!! Thank you, everyone, thank you for making this channel successful. Especially all of you Ant-Mormons, bless your heart, coming in here with all your hate and your emotional comments and getting everyone all stirred up, you have helped a lot! Bless your sweet hearts!!!
I need an article to read on this. Specifically Joseph’s pattern of who he married and when. This is really interesting and potentially paradigm-shifting stuff.
@@onandagus1 Don, do you know how Emma might have discovered Joseph’s relationship with Fanny? What sort of activities would they be doing that would raise suspicion that the relationship was anything other than platonic? I’m thinking a letter? Hand Holding? That sort of thing, not just sexual.
We had a meteor shower about a month ago, I stayed out and saw a large fireball going North to South breaking up towards SLC. I thought there would be a loud bang and nothing.
I've been thoroughly enjoying these episodes with Don Bradley. These episodes and the Saints Unscripted interviews with Brian Hales have really helped expand my understanding of this controversial topic. I'm so glad all this information is becoming available now to answer folks' questions. I recall about 10-15 years ago, there just wasn't much information available online on this topic and on some others of the more controversial topics of church history.
Brilliant! Mind blown and I am loving it! Thank you all for putting out pure gold out on the interwebs! With all the crap out there, it’s so refreshing to listen to something uplifting and exciting. Bravo Don!
Joseph always paid attention to signs and wonders of the heavens. A great example is November 13, 1833. Joseph wrote: “November 13. About 4 o’clock a.m. I was awakened by Brother Davis knocking at my door, and calling me to arise and behold the signs in the heavens. I arose, and to my great joy, beheld the stars fall from heaven like a shower of hail stones; a literal fulfillment of the word of God as recorded in the holy scriptures as a sure sign that the coming of Christ is close at hand. In the midst of this shower of fire, I was led to exclaim, how marvelous are thy works O Lord! I thank thee for thy mercy unto thy servant, save me in thy kingdom for Christ’s sake: Amen.
Thanks! This is an incredible revelation! It sure fits with what confusions have been out there. I am a Perseid especially but meteor shower photographer and I certainly have my interest peaked now! I think I did Orionid once! Perseid, though, was amazing one year with some incredible UFO shots around 2015-16. They are absolutely obvious UFOs. 4 in one shot! The signs and seasons are something I am trying to learn and,this makes me more motivated! Look up around Sept 23rd this year, maybe through Orionids also, but, things are getting hot right now this fall! God bless all of you and especially Don!
Can anyone get Kris Murphy's attention to the fact that I'm offering to talk with him by phone? I'm assuming he just hasn't seen my offers of this several times on a few different episode threads. Having been an ex-Mormon, I understand why he has the questions he does and would be happy to talk with him. Alternatively, if he doesn't want to talk but just throw out insults, I'll just block him. But I'd greatly prefer to have an actual conversation.
You have a heart of gold Don, thank you for offering to do that, hope he takes you up on it. I've been tempted to block him but have restrained myself for some reason. Thank you again for ALL your work but most of all on the 116 pages 👍🙏
This is a mind blower! I love it. It's really about adoption into the Lord's family. As a direct descendant of Zina's second son with Henry Jacobs, (conceived after being sealed to the Prophet) this is something that hits very close to home. Some things I've known passed down by oral tradition. 1 Joseph proposed to Zina prior to her marriage to Henry. She initially declined. 2. Henry was present at Zina's sealing to the Prophet. 3. Henry accepted it whole heartedly and never spoke ill of Joseph. 4. Zina considered this a very sacred thing.
This was awesome! Thanks brethren! I bought Don's book the Lost 116 pages for my birthday and it's phenomenal! Here's hoping he writes more! Including on this topic! That sign in the heavens that Orson Pratt saw is awesome!
@kevinpyne24 - Thanks, Kevin! I'm flattered that you bought my book for yourself for your own birthday. The sign in the heavens discovery blew my mind too!
@onandagus1 I liked it so much that I bought another copy for my parents! :) I'd buy all my siblings a copy if I had the budget for it! Thank you for all the work you've done!
@onandagus1 I’ve watched/listened to like every single podcast featuring you and your book and polygamy research I can find because it’s so amazing! I shared enough videos with my dad that he decided to buy the book and passed it along to me when he finished it (the one where you talked about the engravings and the interpreters was what pushed him to buy it.) I have started reading it, but don’t have much time to actually READ as a mom with little kids and a part time job, so it’s going much more slowly than I would like. Any plans for an audio version any time soon…? For all us multi-tasking people who like to listen to lectures and academic papers for fun? 😂
@@gingersnaps215 'Glad you're loving the book, 'Ginger Snaps'! =D My publisher has a beef with how Amazon does their audio books and has thus deferred making this into an audio book. But I would love to have one made and have even talked with potential narrators. I'll pass along your preference--and hope they make one soon!
Pregnant women, ceiling, power, planting trees of life. Somethings going on here. Flaming swords guarding the way to the tree of life It’s all connected We’re gonna see all of this confirmed in the last days
Maybe the fact that Zina turned out to be "about-to-pop" pregnant means she didn't know what she was talking about when she thought back on her supposed marriage? She said in her later affidavit she had no clue when she was married to joseph, not even the year. I think it would be very memorable that you were pregnant with your first kid and didn't equate that to a year when thinking back on it? Right? She would at least remember the year her kid was born and that she was married a couple months before. I don't know, seems strange. Thinking out loud: The fact that she never lived with Joseph, then suddenly after Joseph's death needs to get sealed to Brigham??? who kicks her husband Henry Jacobs out to serve a mission and brings zina and the kids to live with him us just eerie. Is there at least a chance that Brigham claimed Zina was married to Joseph so that He could have an excuse to take her for himself? Speculation, but that's what's in my head.
If Brigham was prophet and wanted to marry her, why would he need to say "... because she was married to Joseph." Are wives passed from prophet to prophet?
Kris just paid Bill Reel for a personal therapy session. I'd be pissed too if I paid Bill Reel $100 just for him to say "ChuRcH BAd. CHurCh BaD. ChuRCh BAd" for an hour lol
Awesome episode! Always love having Don on the show. The more I learn about this stuff, the more I can't help but wonder if plural marriage (and maybe even marriage in general) is just an esoteric thing that we just can't comprehend fully right now and that's why God hasn't revealed much about it to us. We have bits and pieces about it, but it's really hard to make out exactly what it's for and how it works. Maybe cuz we're not supposed to know right now cuz we wouldn't be able to comprehend it
@rebekah.1234 - Rebekah, agreed. I think that, as you perceptively observe, polygamy, and even marriage itself, have strong esoteric aspects, like in the union of male and female in hermeticism. I am trying to comprehend as much as I can what Joseph was doing in all this, and the purposes of it, and I think there are layers and layers of meaning to it.
@@onandagus1 Absolutely! It's like putting a giant, complicated puzzle together. Grateful for all your work! It's really helpful amid all the rumors and fog that's out there about this topic
Part 1. So many problems left unaddressed. I have really enjoyed listening to the episodes with Don. I'm fascinated by his story of leaving and coming back. That being said, the premise of this episode is beyond faulty and virtually every apologetic conclusion derived by the whole crew are mistaken and baseless. Sorry to burst the bubble. I won't try to tackle everything in a single comment, but here are my rebuttals and some things to consider as you assess the nature of polygamy as practiced by Joseph Smith. Don's thesis is to argue that polygamy for Joseph wasn't about sex. This is silly. Joseph conclusively (at least as conclusively as history can show) had sex with at least some of his wives. If he had it with some, why not all? It would make sense and frankly there's no reason why Joseph shouldn't have sex with his wife/wives. Everyone accepts that every church leader apart from Joseph likely had sex with all of their wives. Why wouldn't Joseph also? Even the Church acknowledges that Joseph had sex with at least some of his wives. Read the Church essay on polygamy in Nauvoo. It's on the Church's site. In addition, read D&C 132. The primary (if not the sole) reason for polygamy is to have sex and have children. Joseph had sex. So, it had to be a factor at a minimum. Let's move on. Kwaku (I recall) makes a statement in jest about Joseph stealing other men's wives, suggesting the silliness of Joseph sleeping with men's wives behind their backs. Regardless of whether Joseph had sex with the polyandrous wives, he did steal other men's wives, at least for here after and for eternity. The only wife that was sealed to her living husband later on was Nancy Marinda Hyde. All others were sealed to Joseph. So, even if they lived in a house with their husband during this lifetime, for eternity afterward those wives belong to Joseph (as much as a wife can "belong" to any man). Just look it up on the Family Search app. They're all there as Joseph's wives, not the other guys. The question of the children also comes up. This is a problem with nearly all apologetics for Mormonism. When an explanation is given in one place to solve a problem, it creates a problem elsewhere. The question was raised about the children born to these women who now were sealed to Joseph. You can easily tell the discomfort it brought up because no one wants to insinuate that Joseph was also taking away a father's child. It was hilarious to see Cardon try to move on as fast as possible, shortly after claiming that Joseph certainly wasn't trying to steal other men's children. Read the Church handbook, section 38. A child can only be sealed to one set of SEALED parents. So, either the children were taken from their natural fathers (which would be my guess based on statements from later prophets), or Joseph's wives will have to go without their children in eternity. This whole policy is a crap storm by itself due to divorce, adoption, etc., but it demonstrates that yes, inherently by sealing himself to other women, even without sex, Joseph was disrupting what could otherwise be an eternal family. For those would claim that Joseph didn't know what he was doing at first (like claimed in the Church's essay), please spare me. Read D&C 124. No one with a straight face can claim that Jesus had enough time to tell Joseph in 1841 how many shares should be doled out for the Nauvoo House and how many dollars should be given for each share, but didn't have enough time to explain to Joseph how to carry out polygamy? Especially when the Church wants to claim that Joseph received the revelation 10 years earlier in 1831, which is likely bogus. I get the line upon line mantra, but you cannot honestly believe that Jesus has the time to get into minutiae of securities law but not have time to tell Joseph not to marry other men's wives, or teenagers. Give me a break. Getting back to the core argument: that the pattern of some of the early wives suggests that Joseph wasn't after sex because the women were married and already pregnant, which would demonstrate that Joseph wasn't the father, thereby proving he didn't have sex with them (at least at first). Even this argument fails with one, possibly two, of the women who are supposed to be part of the "pattern." Moreover, it fails to address Fanny Alger. She wasn't married and was in her teens when Joseph married her. If you want to claim Joseph wasn't after sex because he married pregnant women married to someone else, then why would his first be to an unmarried, not-pregnant teenager? This also fails to address the pattern that Joseph ultimately married at least 2x more single women than married women, including many other teenagers. You talk about history and how the actions describe Joseph's intent. His actions to conceal most of his marriages from Emma (also acknowledged in the Church's essay) indicates keeping secrets from the person who is supposed to be his eternal companion. How about Joseph's letter to the Newel parents asking them to bring their daughter (another polygamous wife) when Emma is not around? The pattern of Joseph's behaviors simply doesn't hold up to support the thesis here.
Part 2. In my opinion, Don wants to re-believe in Joseph that he is misconstruing what he can to put Joseph back on the pedestal. To take from the Fanny Alger episode (I recall), Don views Joseph more positively, based in part on good things he did, like nurture Emma when she was sick and take time to play with his kids. Ask any woman whose been cheated on by her husband. Do you think she views cooking meals, and taking the kids out to play catch as justification for the negatives like infidelity? Given my profession I'd bet the percentage of women who would give a crap would be less than 1%. I'd also argue that the "no sex" concept doesn't hold true with Nancy Marinda, who is one of the women on Don's list. Yes, she was married to Orson Hyde at the time. However, if you go back a bit further, it's not hard to imagine that Joseph had a thing for her and came back around when he could. Joseph was living with then-teenager Nancy Marinda in 1832 when he was taken out of the house to be tarred and feathered along with Sidney Rigdon. I acknowledge the historical evidence to suggest that this was due to Joseph's advances on Nancy are weak. However, we for sure know that he lived with her in her house with her parents, and that he married her polygamously 10 years later. The MO also fits Joseph marrying Fanny Alger (housemaid living with Joseph) and multiple others living in Joseph's house, such as the Partridge sisters (with whom he held a sham/second wedding to deceive Emma after she said Joseph could marry them, because he was already married to them in secret). Another problem is that the marriage to married women who were already pregnant explicitly violates Joseph's revelation on polygamy. Again, read D&C 132. You are only allowed to marry virgins. Again, you try to make one thing okay (arguing Joseph wasn't after sex demonstrated by marrying pregnant women) and create another problem (Joseph was violating the very revelation he supposedly received on polygamy). I also love the silence on the husband's of these women, claiming not much is known. A lot is known. How about Henry Jacobs and how his wife was basically stolen by Joseph, and then by Brigham Young after Joseph died. Of course, church history paints Henry as an uncaring father, but the historical record indicates that he was interested in seeing his family, but was chased off by Brigham. Most of the women were married to members, even an apostle, and others missionaries. So, it cannot realistically be argued that Joseph married these women to give them an opportunity to be sealed and exalted. I also enjoyed the connection with Joseph and Orson about the angel and the sword. Obviously, this is done to downplay the silliness of Joseph's claim (to multiple women) that he had to marry them because an angel with a drawn sword appeared and said he would kill Joseph unless he married them (coercion much?). There's a problem though. Orson is about as reliable of a witness as Joseph Noble. Don discredits Joseph Noble's recounting of when the first marriage occurred in Nauvoo by showing his problem with dates and that his claim that he performed the marriage in his house, which didn't exist until the following year, was not possible. I generally agree with the historical work here done by Don. The problem is that Orson Hyde is just as unreliable. Orson claimed to witness the transfiguration of Brigham Young, which was a pivotal event that assured Brigham's succession as prophet. The only problem is that Orson wasn't in America at the time of the transfiguration speech. So, Orson is just as unreliable as Noble. Thus, why would we believe his comment about the sword in the sky (which is completely unrelated to polygamy) as corroborating Joseph's claim about the angel telling him to practice polygamy, when Orson has already lied (or at best misstated) about witnessing some other religiously significant event? This is poor analysis on Don's part in my opinion and is akin to believing what you want and finding partial data to support it. It's like how apologists will believe Lucy Smith's retelling of events that support Joseph as the prophet, but discredit her statements from the same breath that would suggest Joseph plagiarized Lehi's dream from a dream Joseph Sr. had prior to Joseph getting the plates. Or how apologists will cite to Martin Harris' statements in support of the BOM, but discredit his statements that there was never a mention of the priesthood until years after the supposed restoration. BTW, who is Orson Hyde? He was an apostle. Orson was upset about polygamy when he learned that Joseph had married his wife. However, Orson apparently got over it once Joseph allowed him to start taking polygamous wives. Orson continued this practice throughout his life, marrying 7 women in total. He married a 21-year old when he was 58, and had 5 children with her (so clearly some sex). He married a 22- year old when he was 59. His last wife was 18-years old when he was 60. He obviously had sex with his wives, having over 30 kids total. He obviously married much younger women. Where did he learn polygamy? Joseph Smith; and no members can claim Orson went off the rails as he was an apostle, you know, a prophet, seer, and revelator. In fact, but for a re-ordering of the apostles shortly before Brigham died, Orson, not John Taylor, would have been the prophet. In summary, I simply want to point out that the thesis and arguments made in this video are highly flawed (almost all of them). Cardon attempts to pass this "pattern" off as completely debunking the argument that Joseph was motivated by sex to take polygamous (or polyandrous) wives. Don uses the word refutes, which is appropriate as Don likely recognizes his thesis does not conclusively debunk/establish anything. However, even then, I would submit that the word refutes is generous given the weakness of the pattern presented and the glaring holes that are left unaddressed or inadequately addressed by creating this apologetic narrative. Joseph had sex with some (possibly all) of his wives. Fact. Get over it. If you want to still believe Joseph is a prophet of God, then you need to accept this and find a way to still believe. But don't self-delude yourself by watching this video and thinking that it answers all of the horrors and problems that the history of Mormon polygamy poses to Joseph's credibility.
Well thought out arguments. There are lot of holes to these ideas and Cardon gets too excited claiming presenting this as groundbreaking proof which it is certainly not. Not having sex with a few nauvoo wives does not prove anything about JS's motives. The critical example of a beautiful hot young woman was Fanny. Don talks about it being a proto-polygamy case but doesn't go into detail about how it doesn't fit his model. JS could have committed adultery got caught by Emma and was confirmed an adulterous affair by Oliver and then fabricated polygamy to cover up his sins to not lose trust of the membership of the church and justify his actions to Emma. In order to cover up his sins, he could have laid low and try to construct a "righteous polygamy" by trying to marry only pregnant women. After many years when people get warmed up to the idea, he goes and has sex with non polyandrous marriages. I think it is far fetched to say that JS doesn't have sexual motives just because he married some polyandrous wives. And I would say marrying wives with children makes this even worse. To promote some kind of lineage you are actually destroying an existing family by not just tearing away someone's wive but also their children. How would have the former husbands have felt? In Jacob 2 it talks about the pain and suffering of the women due to polygamy. This also applies to the husbands. Both men and women have their hearts torn out and stomped on by JS polygamy. Does this seem like a commandment from an loving Heavenly Father?
@@williampaul7932 right. I don’t remember the exact number but I recall Emma was the 20th or so wife to be sealed to Joseph. I’m not sure if this is because Joseph was trying to keep things secret from Emma for as long as he could, or if it was withheld from her to induce her to go along with polygamy. Any way you slice it, it demonstrates that Emma was not Joseph’s soulmate and one true love like the modern church tries to portray.
Most people who really freak out over polygamy from 150 years ago believe it's ok for doctors to perform third trimester abortions today, right now. The majority of democrats fit into this camp. Talk about getting your priorities mixed up.
@@joshua.snyder - Nope, he just pointed out the moral hypocrisy of current hard core liberals: "Joseph Smith is a scum bag because we was simply sleeping around but it's ok for me to kill my baby." Today's hard core liberals are moral hypocrites. Sorry, their own actions condemn them.
@onandagus1 ... thank you so much Don Bradley for your research ... I have pointed family who have struggled with Polygamy to this broadcast and I hope and pray it is healing for them ... I believe both Joseph Smith and Joseph Bates Noble were good men ... thanks again
I have just looked at my family tree for Erastus Bingham Senior our first Bingham baptism in 1833. He shows no children with but one wife so far that I can find of his four wives. It looks like at least two of three other women were widowed, one, I can’t figure out if one wife’s husband was possibly a non member which would support spiritual sealing into the seed of Abraham? Erastus Bingham Senior was one of the leaders of 10 in the groups divided to leave Nauvoo and Erastus seemed to know Joseph well.
Basically, yes. Joseph proposed to his mother, Rachel Ivins, but she delayed in accepting the proposal. After Joseph died she married Jedediah M. Grant for time and Joseph for eternity, making Heber a spiritual child of Joseph.
Ah, slippery slope! That Noble performed the marriage is mentioned during Joseph's lifetime, in 1842. And his inaccuracy is on specific things - chronology and self-centering. Otherwise he is often an accurate source.
@@justin-griffin Please re-read what I just wrote above. That the marriage occurred and was performed by Noble was published during Joseph Smith's lifetime - and not by Noble. Others also confirm the marriage. And since, as you reject in true obscurantist fashion, that we have plenty of other evidence that Joseph was marrying women, there's no reason to reject the evidence that this marriage happened.
@@justin-griffin Testimony on it was given in court in the Temple Lot Case. But, to your question, who cares? Historians try to establish what most probably happened in the past, whereas lawyers try to prove things beyond a reasonable doubt. Do I believe that whether Joseph Smith practiced polygamy can stand up in court? Oh yeah.
Is there any way that Don Bradley would come on my show. I won't cut them off after 45 minutes. He can talk for as long as he has the strength to. He is crazy, great with his understanding of our history. So Don, if you're out there. Let me know if you want to do a zoom meeting with me at any time. And we can have a contest on who can talk longer
@@WARDRADIO I am trying to fish here for an interview with Don. And if you keep making noise, he will not take the bait. Lol. You guys always do a great job. I was just kind of setting it up for hammer's sake. Keep doing what you're doing because it is working. If you ever get time for me to come on and tell you about my family, I'm my own conversion to the church, just let me know. Again, you guys are the best show on CZcams by far.
I’m on to you Don. My guess is that in this episode you will make some new correlations when there are none. That way you can come up with some new fresh controversial ideas and it will draw more people to your book. I could be wrong but we shall see.
Brigham Young was a polygamist, and needed to convince the saints that polygamy originated with Joseph. All the records indicating Joseph engaged in polygamy came after his death when BY strongly encouraged everyone to remember events a certain way. It's all nonsense.
@@WARDRADIO Certainly, the easy thing is to believe all the evidence suggesting section 132 was revelation from God through Joseph, and recorded by William Clayton. When you begin to examine the credibility of those sources, and the motives they might have to lie, the waters get very muddy very quickly.
yeah, i don't get the "motives" thing. Do you think they liked polygamy? Do you think WE like it? Everyone frickin' hated it. That's where you lose me. EVERYONE hated it. The men hated it THE MOST. So I don't track with your "ew! Think of all they had to gain" argument. It was repulsive and everyone knew it. Regardless section 132 was definitely from Joseph... We've been over this...
@@WARDRADIO Furthermore, once you understand the true nature of God, you realize that polygamy cannot be of God. Godhood is to create posterity in Eternity, and monogamous marriage establishes the very foundation for that to occur. The creation story teaches that "God's image" is both male and female together, united as one. Perhaps that is why God's name Elohim is a plural term. Man or woman by themselves can only be half a God. It takes both to create life, and without that, there is no God. Only when husband and wife join together in heart and mind as one flesh can they together become one God. Polygamy destroys the unity of the couple necessary to fill the measure of our creation, and have our companionship sealed up in Godhood. In ancient days, powerful men were deceived by the adversary into taking multiple wives, and so were men in the Church also deceived in our day. Whether it began with Joseph or Brigham is less important than understanding that plural marriage has never come from God, and never will because it completely destroys God's plan for us.
Is it possible these pregnant married women with husbands outside of the church were preparing for death during childbirth which was very common back then? Many women would make out their wills while pregnant just in case of death in childbirth…so in preparation it’s possible they wanted to ensure they made that covenant before birth…just a thought I had.
My grandfather's grandfather, Joseph Ellison Beck, gave the purse of gold to Orson Hyde, so Orson could dedicate the holy land for gospel. Joseph is mentioned as the stranger that made in possible, not by name, in the recorded dedicatory prayer.
I heard that they believed that they were sealing families to Jesus and God THROUGH Joseph Smith. So Sealings at that time was basically the means to seal yourself to go and eternal life in one big family.
That's my job, I'm like a witch, laughing, snickering, giggling, cackling, stirring everything up and getting you Anti-Mormons oh so very grumpy. Heh heh, and I am quite successful at it.
Thank you Don for your research and insights! The tide of filthy spewing by critics is rising, but you poked a big hole in the tank with your discoveries of the women Joseph Smith married being pregnant and remaining married to their original spouse.
My opinion for a few decades: Joseph Smith was obsessed with creating a web of sealings in order to make the Church members interconnected through sealings as one big Celestial family.
The biggest mistake Don and the rest of the polygamy apologists make is not noticing there are no credible, contemporary (pre-1844) sources actually stating plural marriage is a revealed doctrine. Additionally, no one from Joseph to Hyrum to Emma actually stated it during that time. Those who believe he practiced and preached polygamy will one day regret how easily they were mislead.
Plural marriage is one thing Polygamy is a totally different thing Concubines and harems are yet a totally other thing And as you lay them out side by side, in the context that they each take place in, you clearly see that they have nothing in common with each other on a heavenly, eternal scale Only one of these things is heavenly, the others are not
Don Juan descends from on high… you guys are hilarious. Great answers. I actually think most members who are active in the church don’t even know this. I didn’t.
@onandagus1 The end of plural marriage is just as mysterious to me as the beginning of it. If it truly was instituted by God. Do we have good evidence that it was ended by God?
You can read the testimonies of Wilford Woodruff. He also writes about it in his journal. The Lord showed him what would happen to the church if they did not stop the practice. He doesn't say this, but I believe the reason was because they were not progressing in unity, and living the Laws of Stewardship and Consecration. They weren't living the Law of the Priesthood in its fulness as well, which we don't have, but believe we could have if we started living the Laws of Stewardship and Consecration again.
I think the Prophet was scared to actually activate this marriage system, it seems only under the threat of the angel with the drawn sword he tells Zina he's not going to put it off any longer
I thought some of this was due to a misunderstanding of sealing & that there was a thought that in order to ensure your eternal family, a member of your family had to be sealed to a really righteous member of the church, like a prophet or apostle. And that later one of the prophets said that was no longer necessary and that you just needed to be sealed to your own relatives.
This is so good. I appreciate the true information Thank you so much for doing this. My husband, son, daughter in law, brother (who introduced my family) left the church because of that and more. I need to somehow get them this information. I can’t do it because it would become continuous with us.
Do we know appx what time Joseph said the angel showed up with sword drawn? Beirut is 7 time zones from New York. It would be reallllly cool to note that the two events (meteor vision) were simultaneous
Doesn't this video totally refute Michelle Stone's claims? I'm curious what a conversation between her and Don Bradley would look like. Don Bradley is a more authoritative source, in my opinion.
This from Van Wagoner adds a lot to the story: "Brigham Young was [the] one who told him outright his family was not his before sending Jacobs on his mission and taking Zina, citing his spiritual authority as prophet/Joseph’s proxy. In Mormon Polygamy, it states: 'Young wanted Zina D. Huntington Jacobs. Smith had taken her as a plural wife with her husband Jacob's consent while six months pregnant in October 1841 […] she would belong to Joseph Smith in eternity. ' (45) Then, during the trek west at Mt. Pisgah, Iowa, Young told Jacobs “[T]he woman you claim for a wife does not belong to you. She is the spiritual wife of Brother Joseph, sealed up to him. I am his proxy, and she, in this behalf, with her children are my property. You can go where you please, and get another but be sure to get one of your own kindred spirit." (Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History 2nd Edition, p. 44) Other contemporaneous accounts of this, I'm not sure if there are, but the fact that Henry was kicked out of his family and wrote love letters to Zina wishing for her makes it seem very credible. Why did Joseph not kick Henry away? Why did suddenly Brigham kick henry out? Why did Brigham have to redo the sealing to joseph if it had already happened? It seems to me because Joseph wasn't married to her to begin with.
Don't feel bad, Anti-Mormons, if you try real hard you will be able to fly around in the clouds for all eternity, and that's cool, man. Nothing wrong with that.
Between the Daybells and now the Frankes, people are bound to start associating the church with these abusive cults that are started by people who happen to have been LDS
I haven't finished listening yet but so far It sounds like the prophet found a loophole way to get around the whole polygamy issue that he didn't want to participate in, but that God told him he must! (The whole angel of God threatening to kill him if he wouldn't begin the practice) I wonder if he was so deeply in love with Emma that he did everything he could to avoid hurting her?
No matter what you say, Kris just repeats the same debunked slander. You can say: Now we know Fanny was 18! And he'll keep saying she was 14 until judgment day
@@onandagus1 Step out of the accusatory fog. Remember Kris that Don was an atheist anti mormon for ten years. What his incentive in coming back and defending The Prophet? I respect you, but VERY YOUNG is according to our 21 century standards. Back then she was not considered a minor. Plus we have strong evidence that there is not sexual activity with Fanny. Best Wishes
I think with somanyconfusing and unknown facts about polygamy and polyandry practiced in the early Saints is to trust that there was more to this than we know and to trust their hearts and desire to do right. There is a lot of perversion and deviance ascribed to this practice but the opposite seems to be true. It's interesting that polygamy being practiced now is is very dysfunctional and self-serving.
Don... I'm an active member but the scripture I struggle with the most is D&C 132:64-65. That one really feels greatly of male favoritism/ submission etc.... I have always had a hard time with that and completely disagree with it. But I know sometimes the language back then was different than how we hear things now.
Your instincts are correct. This gave Joseph permission to do whatever he wanted. Regardless of how Emma felt. She should be destroyed according to God if she does not agree with it and even if she doesn’t Joseph could still practice polygamy. Isn’t that convenient?
@@StompMom5 Understood. That's perhaps the most difficult part of D&C 132. I'm doing further work on D&C 132 to understand the whole revelation, including that passage, much better. I can't say that that work will make this passage more palatable, but it will at least make it more understandable in its context. One idea for dealing with this passage would be to understand that Joseph was the one who put his revelations into words, and Joseph was under great stress in the circumstance since - the sources show - Emma was threatening divorce. Under that stress it would make sense that Joseph's own desperation and frustration leaked through into the text he dictated, making it more strident than it should have been.
@@onandagus1 Nevermind I can answer that. It’s Joseph. Not God. Just Joseph either pretending to hear from God or maybe it’s the Angel of Light (Satan)
8:24 this question is the key question to ask. Plural marriage was a made up teaching. At mass, there was some sort of sincere motive behind it by Brigham and his crew, but at worst, there was a much more nefarious, purpose, and motive at play and Joseph, Emma and Hyrum got caught in the crossfire.
I was a gospel doctrine teacher back in the day. It was 2013 or 2014. It was the D&C year. At any rate, this guy moved into our ward and was in my class. I remember that he kept raising his hand to offer insights or corrections, or to elaborate on this or that thing. I was utterly transfixed. I wanted to cancel the class, and just sit and ask him 1,000,001 questions. Obviously it was Dan Bradley, who moved into our ward. He’s easily one of the most insightful and intelligent church historians that I’ve ever known. And very sincere and heartfelt. Dude is 100% legit.
Great job, guys! I'm a convert to the LDS church, having joined over 40 years ago in my 20s. I just recently discovered your channel and have been watching a lot of your videos!
Hello Cindy! Welcome to the Ward! we're so glad to have you!
They’re the best!
Cindy is the crazy doll collector lady! She rocks.
@@obiwonkanoli no my
Lo
O o lo
O
O
O po
.
I came to the same conclusion long ago but as a result of reading Wilford Woodruff's Witness by Jennifer Mackley. She explains that until Wilford Woodruff people were sealed into priesthood lines, not as families.
When we realize this reality, suddenly polyandry makes sense. If they believed that exaltation was only possible for those who were sealed in an eternal marriage, who better to be sealed to than the Prophet?
Joseph Smith was an imperfect man, no doubt. But he was an honest man. The historical record and church doctrine at the time simply DO NOT support the idea he practiced polygamy for sexually opportunistic reasons. And it's past time people just come to grips with that.
One might say he wasn't a prophet. Unbelievers might even say he was deceived. But a dishonest charlatan he was not.
@justinlabar Amen!!!
I've always maintained that the "sealings" that were done in those days were innocently done by those who were brand new to the sealing power and principle. We live now with over 170 years of experience with the sealing power. It was brand new to them and they were just learning about it.
Why wasn’t Emma Smith the first sealing then? A “prophet “ of God can’t even get sealed to his actual wife first? He decided to hide his other sealings from her. Wasn’t Emma like the 18th sealing instead of the first? How could you do that to your wife?
@@Eagle_Powers That's all between Joseph and Emma. It's their marriage, not yours. It's none of our business how they worked that out. It's also not appropriate for us in 2023 to judge how they used the sealing power back then because we are now operating with over 170 years of experience, clarifications, and understanding. It was new to them and they had to learn.
@@Eagle_Powers, perhaps because she did not support him being sealed to anyone else, and so she told him IF he did follow through with other women, she would NOT be sealed to him. 17 wives later, she came around. There are so many possible scenarios and we just can’t read into them all.
I’ve been loving every episode with Don- absolutely brilliant!
Thanks, Chris!
@@onandagus1Another question Don😊. I would LOVE to know your thoughts on the heavenly signs- the night Joseph picked up the plates. The army in the sky? That's one of my favorite stories🤍
@@StompMom5 That one intrigues me too. I've explored it a little but really need to explore it more. If the subject Joseph Smith and heavenly signs interests you, we need to stay in touch. While I haven't yet very fully covered the army in the sky, I've explored this subject *quite a bit* in other cases and have found some mind-blowing stuff! 😁
@@onandagus1 Quick question, do we have any of Joseph's journals, diaries, or letters on the topic of his polygamy (plural marriage) and his feelings towards it? I once saw a video done by a member where he said Joseph had written a symbol meaning "hell" in his journal on a particular day when he and Emma were having a heated disagreement about the issue. Is there any validity to this story or any written testimony from Joseph on the matter, short of the historical inference that he seemed to delay the practice due to his desire not to practice it out of revulsion or fear? Thanks!
These episodes with Don are excellent and so needed to refute the crap going around.
Thanks, Wendy!
"crap"??? LOL. Do did you hear Don mention how many of Joseph's Adult wives WERE NOT PREGNANT??? ALL of the Young Girls Joseph Married were not pregnant either.
In an alternate reality, Don was THE CES Director and answered all Jeremy’s “questions” easily, saving tons of people
@shibainferno - Bahahahaha! My favorite comment. Shiba, you are awesome!
@@onandagus1 thank YOU so much for sharing your knowledge and experiences. Each of your episodes is 🔥from heaven, man. Thanks again
@@shibainferno Aw, I'm SO glad they're useful!
Actually, an episodic series where Don meticulously goes through the list would still be VERY helpful
@@vendingdudes I agree! But Jeremy will just update it again and again with more 3rd and 4th hand sources lol Jeremy's gotta keep those donations coming in somehow
Im hoping Don comes out with more books. His book on the 116 pages was awesome.
Thanks, Jacob!
I can't wait to read it. It's on order!! Thanks Don for all your info. The truth always comes out. Just grateful you've found all this! 🙏❤️⚘️
@@3-jalee Aw, thanks! I hope enjoy the book!
@onandagus1 how do I access your articles about Alger and dating the plural marriage? Great content btw. I read your book on 116 pages
I can’t tell you how much I have enjoyed Don being on your program. To say this is fantastic is an understatement. I’m going to share this one with a dear friend who is an active faithful member, but thought the drawn sword was a lie. He will love this. Thank you!
Don just keeps exceeding expectations. You rock bro!
@jwnaugle - Thanks!! =D
I wish these were even longer episodes! This stuff is pure gold.
DANG.....YOU GUYS ARE ON FIRE🔥
not yet. just wait until Christ returns. this whole thing is a circle jerk.
This was amazing! Keep up the research, Don, and presenting it in such a straightforward way. Thanks, Ward Radio! I really enjoyed this.
@ChapinaUSA Thanks! =D
Glad you enjoyed it!
another excellent chat....loved it, thank you all.
SIXTEEN THOUSAND SUBSCRIBERS!!!!
Thank you, everyone, thank you for making this channel successful. Especially all of you Ant-Mormons, bless your heart, coming in here with all your hate and your emotional comments and getting everyone all stirred up, you have helped a lot! Bless your sweet hearts!!!
I need an article to read on this. Specifically Joseph’s pattern of who he married and when. This is really interesting and potentially paradigm-shifting stuff.
@JerrodGuddat I'm writing one.
@@onandagus1 Don, do you know how Emma might have discovered Joseph’s relationship with Fanny? What sort of activities would they be doing that would raise suspicion that the relationship was anything other than platonic? I’m thinking a letter? Hand Holding? That sort of thing, not just sexual.
@@mcable217Different accounts suggest different things. One account says unidentified "intimacy," another says a "sealing."
Agreed!
We had a meteor shower about a month ago, I stayed out and saw a large fireball going North to South breaking up towards SLC. I thought there would be a loud bang and nothing.
so.... do we believe these guys and not Emma and Joseph when they both denied polygamy was ever practiced.
I've been thoroughly enjoying these episodes with Don Bradley. These episodes and the Saints Unscripted interviews with Brian Hales have really helped expand my understanding of this controversial topic. I'm so glad all this information is becoming available now to answer folks' questions. I recall about 10-15 years ago, there just wasn't much information available online on this topic and on some others of the more controversial topics of church history.
These recent thumbnails for the Don Bradley videos are legendary and hilarious!! Keep up the good work!
Glad you like them!
Just curious, how many Don Bradley episodes do you expect to release? This some of the best content I’ve seen and I can’t wait for more!
What a blessing this man had the guts and wisdom to do the research! It baffles me it wasn’t researched a 100 years ago!
Instead of a button for the Bat Signal, all wards need a button for the Don Bradley Signal when they need him to answer historical questions 🤯
😅Nice!
LOL!
😃😄😁😆😅🤣
When you need real history it’s called the Bible. But that would refute almost everything that is spoken here.
@@Eagle_Powers i get it… so you’re one of those…
Brilliant! Mind blown and I am loving it! Thank you all for putting out pure gold out on the interwebs! With all the crap out there, it’s so refreshing to listen to something uplifting and exciting. Bravo Don!
Stoked for this one to come out!
Joseph always paid attention to signs and wonders of the heavens. A great example is November 13, 1833.
Joseph wrote:
“November 13. About 4 o’clock a.m. I was awakened by Brother Davis knocking at my door, and calling me to arise and behold the signs in the heavens. I arose, and to my great joy, beheld the stars fall from heaven like a shower of hail stones; a literal fulfillment of the word of God as recorded in the holy scriptures as a sure sign that the coming of Christ is close at hand. In the midst of this shower of fire, I was led to exclaim, how marvelous are thy works O Lord! I thank thee for thy mercy unto thy servant, save me in thy kingdom for Christ’s sake: Amen.
@randyfischer5082 RIGHT?! You've got it!
Thanks! This is an incredible revelation! It sure fits with what confusions have been out there. I am a Perseid especially but meteor shower photographer and I certainly have my interest peaked now! I think I did Orionid once! Perseid, though, was amazing one year with some incredible UFO shots around 2015-16. They are absolutely obvious UFOs. 4 in one shot! The signs and seasons are something I am trying to learn and,this makes me more motivated! Look up around Sept 23rd this year, maybe through Orionids also, but, things are getting hot right now this fall! God bless all of you and especially Don!
Wow! Great info. Thanks for sharing
Can anyone get Kris Murphy's attention to the fact that I'm offering to talk with him by phone? I'm assuming he just hasn't seen my offers of this several times on a few different episode threads. Having been an ex-Mormon, I understand why he has the questions he does and would be happy to talk with him. Alternatively, if he doesn't want to talk but just throw out insults, I'll just block him. But I'd greatly prefer to have an actual conversation.
We’ve all tried to have a dialogue, but he won’t have it. I blocked him
@@ItsSnagret Good to know, Snagret. I'm still trying--just a little bit longer.
@@onandagus1good on you!
You have a heart of gold Don, thank you for offering to do that, hope he takes you up on it.
I've been tempted to block him but have restrained myself for some reason. Thank you again for ALL your work but most of all on the 116 pages 👍🙏
@@Canut0 Thanks, bro! =D
This is a mind blower! I love it. It's really about adoption into the Lord's family. As a direct descendant of Zina's second son with Henry Jacobs, (conceived after being sealed to the Prophet) this is something that hits very close to home. Some things I've known passed down by oral tradition. 1 Joseph proposed to Zina prior to her marriage to Henry. She initially declined. 2. Henry was present at Zina's sealing to the Prophet. 3. Henry accepted it whole heartedly and never spoke ill of Joseph. 4. Zina considered this a very sacred thing.
This was awesome! Thanks brethren! I bought Don's book the Lost 116 pages for my birthday and it's phenomenal! Here's hoping he writes more! Including on this topic! That sign in the heavens that Orson Pratt saw is awesome!
@kevinpyne24 - Thanks, Kevin! I'm flattered that you bought my book for yourself for your own birthday. The sign in the heavens discovery blew my mind too!
@onandagus1 I liked it so much that I bought another copy for my parents! :) I'd buy all my siblings a copy if I had the budget for it! Thank you for all the work you've done!
It is a seminal book. The best scholarship the church has had since Hugh Nibley.
@onandagus1 I’ve watched/listened to like every single podcast featuring you and your book and polygamy research I can find because it’s so amazing! I shared enough videos with my dad that he decided to buy the book and passed it along to me when he finished it (the one where you talked about the engravings and the interpreters was what pushed him to buy it.)
I have started reading it, but don’t have much time to actually READ as a mom with little kids and a part time job, so it’s going much more slowly than I would like. Any plans for an audio version any time soon…? For all us multi-tasking people who like to listen to lectures and academic papers for fun? 😂
@@gingersnaps215 'Glad you're loving the book, 'Ginger Snaps'! =D My publisher has a beef with how Amazon does their audio books and has thus deferred making this into an audio book. But I would love to have one made and have even talked with potential narrators. I'll pass along your preference--and hope they make one soon!
Keep going!!! This is awesome 😎
Pregnant women, ceiling, power, planting trees of life. Somethings going on here.
Flaming swords guarding the way to the tree of life
It’s all connected
We’re gonna see all of this confirmed in the last days
Bravo 👏🏻 Another hit 🤘🏻
Wow this is some good stuff where can I read the findings of Brother Bradley?
Dude!!! Love you guys, you are so sincere and pure with your intent.
Maybe the fact that Zina turned out to be "about-to-pop" pregnant means she didn't know what she was talking about when she thought back on her supposed marriage? She said in her later affidavit she had no clue when she was married to joseph, not even the year. I think it would be very memorable that you were pregnant with your first kid and didn't equate that to a year when thinking back on it? Right? She would at least remember the year her kid was born and that she was married a couple months before. I don't know, seems strange.
Thinking out loud: The fact that she never lived with Joseph, then suddenly after Joseph's death needs to get sealed to Brigham??? who kicks her husband Henry Jacobs out to serve a mission and brings zina and the kids to live with him us just eerie. Is there at least a chance that Brigham claimed Zina was married to Joseph so that He could have an excuse to take her for himself? Speculation, but that's what's in my head.
If Brigham was prophet and wanted to marry her, why would he need to say "... because she was married to Joseph." Are wives passed from prophet to prophet?
So good!!!!
Wow. This is incredible.
Am in Nauvoo NOW and everybody has ONE wife including the Catholics. The only guys that don't have one wife have zero.
😅I sympathize with their condition. I am currently practicing "zerogamy," but hoping to change that!
Kris will come in later today, go easy on him, he had a rough night, someone took a dump in his purse.
Kris just paid Bill Reel for a personal therapy session. I'd be pissed too if I paid Bill Reel $100 just for him to say "ChuRcH BAd. CHurCh BaD. ChuRCh BAd" for an hour lol
@@GwPoKo Lol!!!!
Don Bradley!!! Yeah Baby!!!!
Thanks, Landon! The "yeah baby" may even be a bit literal for this one!
Awesome episode! Always love having Don on the show.
The more I learn about this stuff, the more I can't help but wonder if plural marriage (and maybe even marriage in general) is just an esoteric thing that we just can't comprehend fully right now and that's why God hasn't revealed much about it to us. We have bits and pieces about it, but it's really hard to make out exactly what it's for and how it works. Maybe cuz we're not supposed to know right now cuz we wouldn't be able to comprehend it
@rebekah.1234 - Rebekah, agreed. I think that, as you perceptively observe, polygamy, and even marriage itself, have strong esoteric aspects, like in the union of male and female in hermeticism. I am trying to comprehend as much as I can what Joseph was doing in all this, and the purposes of it, and I think there are layers and layers of meaning to it.
@@onandagus1 Absolutely! It's like putting a giant, complicated puzzle together. Grateful for all your work! It's really helpful amid all the rumors and fog that's out there about this topic
You guys need to wake up. God already told us marriage is between a man and a woman period! Not between a man and WOMEN!!!!
@@Eagle_Powers Tell that to Jacob... how did he reconcile being married to Leah and then Rachel?
@@ChapinaUSA Did God marry them or command him to take them both as wives or did Laban deceive him?
The end of the video definitely points to the signs and wonders in the Heavens and also adds to the fact that there is so much more to all of this.
Part 1.
So many problems left unaddressed. I have really enjoyed listening to the episodes with Don. I'm fascinated by his story of leaving and coming back. That being said, the premise of this episode is beyond faulty and virtually every apologetic conclusion derived by the whole crew are mistaken and baseless. Sorry to burst the bubble. I won't try to tackle everything in a single comment, but here are my rebuttals and some things to consider as you assess the nature of polygamy as practiced by Joseph Smith.
Don's thesis is to argue that polygamy for Joseph wasn't about sex. This is silly. Joseph conclusively (at least as conclusively as history can show) had sex with at least some of his wives. If he had it with some, why not all? It would make sense and frankly there's no reason why Joseph shouldn't have sex with his wife/wives. Everyone accepts that every church leader apart from Joseph likely had sex with all of their wives. Why wouldn't Joseph also? Even the Church acknowledges that Joseph had sex with at least some of his wives. Read the Church essay on polygamy in Nauvoo. It's on the Church's site.
In addition, read D&C 132. The primary (if not the sole) reason for polygamy is to have sex and have children. Joseph had sex. So, it had to be a factor at a minimum. Let's move on.
Kwaku (I recall) makes a statement in jest about Joseph stealing other men's wives, suggesting the silliness of Joseph sleeping with men's wives behind their backs. Regardless of whether Joseph had sex with the polyandrous wives, he did steal other men's wives, at least for here after and for eternity. The only wife that was sealed to her living husband later on was Nancy Marinda Hyde. All others were sealed to Joseph. So, even if they lived in a house with their husband during this lifetime, for eternity afterward those wives belong to Joseph (as much as a wife can "belong" to any man). Just look it up on the Family Search app. They're all there as Joseph's wives, not the other guys.
The question of the children also comes up. This is a problem with nearly all apologetics for Mormonism. When an explanation is given in one place to solve a problem, it creates a problem elsewhere. The question was raised about the children born to these women who now were sealed to Joseph. You can easily tell the discomfort it brought up because no one wants to insinuate that Joseph was also taking away a father's child. It was hilarious to see Cardon try to move on as fast as possible, shortly after claiming that Joseph certainly wasn't trying to steal other men's children. Read the Church handbook, section 38. A child can only be sealed to one set of SEALED parents. So, either the children were taken from their natural fathers (which would be my guess based on statements from later prophets), or Joseph's wives will have to go without their children in eternity. This whole policy is a crap storm by itself due to divorce, adoption, etc., but it demonstrates that yes, inherently by sealing himself to other women, even without sex, Joseph was disrupting what could otherwise be an eternal family.
For those would claim that Joseph didn't know what he was doing at first (like claimed in the Church's essay), please spare me. Read D&C 124. No one with a straight face can claim that Jesus had enough time to tell Joseph in 1841 how many shares should be doled out for the Nauvoo House and how many dollars should be given for each share, but didn't have enough time to explain to Joseph how to carry out polygamy? Especially when the Church wants to claim that Joseph received the revelation 10 years earlier in 1831, which is likely bogus. I get the line upon line mantra, but you cannot honestly believe that Jesus has the time to get into minutiae of securities law but not have time to tell Joseph not to marry other men's wives, or teenagers. Give me a break.
Getting back to the core argument: that the pattern of some of the early wives suggests that Joseph wasn't after sex because the women were married and already pregnant, which would demonstrate that Joseph wasn't the father, thereby proving he didn't have sex with them (at least at first). Even this argument fails with one, possibly two, of the women who are supposed to be part of the "pattern." Moreover, it fails to address Fanny Alger. She wasn't married and was in her teens when Joseph married her. If you want to claim Joseph wasn't after sex because he married pregnant women married to someone else, then why would his first be to an unmarried, not-pregnant teenager? This also fails to address the pattern that Joseph ultimately married at least 2x more single women than married women, including many other teenagers. You talk about history and how the actions describe Joseph's intent. His actions to conceal most of his marriages from Emma (also acknowledged in the Church's essay) indicates keeping secrets from the person who is supposed to be his eternal companion. How about Joseph's letter to the Newel parents asking them to bring their daughter (another polygamous wife) when Emma is not around? The pattern of Joseph's behaviors simply doesn't hold up to support the thesis here.
Part 2.
In my opinion, Don wants to re-believe in Joseph that he is misconstruing what he can to put Joseph back on the pedestal. To take from the Fanny Alger episode (I recall), Don views Joseph more positively, based in part on good things he did, like nurture Emma when she was sick and take time to play with his kids. Ask any woman whose been cheated on by her husband. Do you think she views cooking meals, and taking the kids out to play catch as justification for the negatives like infidelity? Given my profession I'd bet the percentage of women who would give a crap would be less than 1%.
I'd also argue that the "no sex" concept doesn't hold true with Nancy Marinda, who is one of the women on Don's list. Yes, she was married to Orson Hyde at the time. However, if you go back a bit further, it's not hard to imagine that Joseph had a thing for her and came back around when he could. Joseph was living with then-teenager Nancy Marinda in 1832 when he was taken out of the house to be tarred and feathered along with Sidney Rigdon. I acknowledge the historical evidence to suggest that this was due to Joseph's advances on Nancy are weak. However, we for sure know that he lived with her in her house with her parents, and that he married her polygamously 10 years later. The MO also fits Joseph marrying Fanny Alger (housemaid living with Joseph) and multiple others living in Joseph's house, such as the Partridge sisters (with whom he held a sham/second wedding to deceive Emma after she said Joseph could marry them, because he was already married to them in secret).
Another problem is that the marriage to married women who were already pregnant explicitly violates Joseph's revelation on polygamy. Again, read D&C 132. You are only allowed to marry virgins. Again, you try to make one thing okay (arguing Joseph wasn't after sex demonstrated by marrying pregnant women) and create another problem (Joseph was violating the very revelation he supposedly received on polygamy).
I also love the silence on the husband's of these women, claiming not much is known. A lot is known. How about Henry Jacobs and how his wife was basically stolen by Joseph, and then by Brigham Young after Joseph died. Of course, church history paints Henry as an uncaring father, but the historical record indicates that he was interested in seeing his family, but was chased off by Brigham. Most of the women were married to members, even an apostle, and others missionaries. So, it cannot realistically be argued that Joseph married these women to give them an opportunity to be sealed and exalted.
I also enjoyed the connection with Joseph and Orson about the angel and the sword. Obviously, this is done to downplay the silliness of Joseph's claim (to multiple women) that he had to marry them because an angel with a drawn sword appeared and said he would kill Joseph unless he married them (coercion much?). There's a problem though. Orson is about as reliable of a witness as Joseph Noble. Don discredits Joseph Noble's recounting of when the first marriage occurred in Nauvoo by showing his problem with dates and that his claim that he performed the marriage in his house, which didn't exist until the following year, was not possible. I generally agree with the historical work here done by Don. The problem is that Orson Hyde is just as unreliable. Orson claimed to witness the transfiguration of Brigham Young, which was a pivotal event that assured Brigham's succession as prophet. The only problem is that Orson wasn't in America at the time of the transfiguration speech. So, Orson is just as unreliable as Noble. Thus, why would we believe his comment about the sword in the sky (which is completely unrelated to polygamy) as corroborating Joseph's claim about the angel telling him to practice polygamy, when Orson has already lied (or at best misstated) about witnessing some other religiously significant event? This is poor analysis on Don's part in my opinion and is akin to believing what you want and finding partial data to support it. It's like how apologists will believe Lucy Smith's retelling of events that support Joseph as the prophet, but discredit her statements from the same breath that would suggest Joseph plagiarized Lehi's dream from a dream Joseph Sr. had prior to Joseph getting the plates. Or how apologists will cite to Martin Harris' statements in support of the BOM, but discredit his statements that there was never a mention of the priesthood until years after the supposed restoration.
BTW, who is Orson Hyde? He was an apostle. Orson was upset about polygamy when he learned that Joseph had married his wife. However, Orson apparently got over it once Joseph allowed him to start taking polygamous wives. Orson continued this practice throughout his life, marrying 7 women in total. He married a 21-year old when he was 58, and had 5 children with her (so clearly some sex). He married a 22- year old when he was 59. His last wife was 18-years old when he was 60. He obviously had sex with his wives, having over 30 kids total. He obviously married much younger women. Where did he learn polygamy? Joseph Smith; and no members can claim Orson went off the rails as he was an apostle, you know, a prophet, seer, and revelator. In fact, but for a re-ordering of the apostles shortly before Brigham died, Orson, not John Taylor, would have been the prophet.
In summary, I simply want to point out that the thesis and arguments made in this video are highly flawed (almost all of them). Cardon attempts to pass this "pattern" off as completely debunking the argument that Joseph was motivated by sex to take polygamous (or polyandrous) wives. Don uses the word refutes, which is appropriate as Don likely recognizes his thesis does not conclusively debunk/establish anything. However, even then, I would submit that the word refutes is generous given the weakness of the pattern presented and the glaring holes that are left unaddressed or inadequately addressed by creating this apologetic narrative. Joseph had sex with some (possibly all) of his wives. Fact. Get over it. If you want to still believe Joseph is a prophet of God, then you need to accept this and find a way to still believe. But don't self-delude yourself by watching this video and thinking that it answers all of the horrors and problems that the history of Mormon polygamy poses to Joseph's credibility.
Well thought out arguments. There are lot of holes to these ideas and Cardon gets too excited claiming presenting this as groundbreaking proof which it is certainly not. Not having sex with a few nauvoo wives does not prove anything about JS's motives. The critical example of a beautiful hot young woman was Fanny. Don talks about it being a proto-polygamy case but doesn't go into detail about how it doesn't fit his model. JS could have committed adultery got caught by Emma and was confirmed an adulterous affair by Oliver and then fabricated polygamy to cover up his sins to not lose trust of the membership of the church and justify his actions to Emma. In order to cover up his sins, he could have laid low and try to construct a "righteous polygamy" by trying to marry only pregnant women. After many years when people get warmed up to the idea, he goes and has sex with non polyandrous marriages. I think it is far fetched to say that JS doesn't have sexual motives just because he married some polyandrous wives. And I would say marrying wives with children makes this even worse. To promote some kind of lineage you are actually destroying an existing family by not just tearing away someone's wive but also their children. How would have the former husbands have felt? In Jacob 2 it talks about the pain and suffering of the women due to polygamy. This also applies to the husbands. Both men and women have their hearts torn out and stomped on by JS polygamy. Does this seem like a commandment from an loving Heavenly Father?
Emma was not the first wife Joseph was sealed to.
@@williampaul7932 right. I don’t remember the exact number but I recall Emma was the 20th or so wife to be sealed to Joseph. I’m not sure if this is because Joseph was trying to keep things secret from Emma for as long as he could, or if it was withheld from her to induce her to go along with polygamy. Any way you slice it, it demonstrates that Emma was not Joseph’s soulmate and one true love like the modern church tries to portray.
Amazing 🤩
God bless Don
Hope Don becomes a mainstay in Ward Radio. Give him a calling already!
😂
Most people who really freak out over polygamy from 150 years ago believe it's ok for doctors to perform third trimester abortions today, right now. The majority of democrats fit into this camp.
Talk about getting your priorities mixed up.
very true...well said. You made a good point there.
False equivalency.
🤣🫣💯👍🏼
@@joshua.snyder - Nope, he just pointed out the moral hypocrisy of current hard core liberals: "Joseph Smith is a scum bag because we was simply sleeping around but it's ok for me to kill my baby." Today's hard core liberals are moral hypocrites. Sorry, their own actions condemn them.
Funny how people think a man marrying two women is wrong, but a man sleeping with two women is okay.
This is awesome!!
Bombshell Bradley = awesome
aw thanks, Harry!
@onandagus1 ... thank you so much Don Bradley for your research ... I have pointed family who have struggled with Polygamy to this broadcast and I hope and pray it is healing for them ... I believe both Joseph Smith and Joseph Bates Noble were good men ... thanks again
@glenspendlove1309 Wonderful!! =)
I have just looked at my family tree for Erastus Bingham Senior our first Bingham baptism in 1833. He shows no children with but one wife so far that I can find of his four wives. It looks like at least two of three other women were widowed, one, I can’t figure out if one wife’s husband was possibly a non member which would support spiritual sealing into the seed of Abraham? Erastus Bingham Senior was one of the leaders of 10 in the groups divided to leave Nauvoo and Erastus seemed to know Joseph well.
Is there somewhere where I can get that powerpoint Don put together?
24:50. Wasn't Heber J Grant under the category of "child" of Joseph Smith, or am I completely mistaken?
Basically, yes. Joseph proposed to his mother, Rachel Ivins, but she delayed in accepting the proposal. After Joseph died she married Jedediah M. Grant for time and Joseph for eternity, making Heber a spiritual child of Joseph.
If Noble was so bad at remembering and was even considered a liar, why does anyone believe his account at all?
Ah, slippery slope! That Noble performed the marriage is mentioned during Joseph's lifetime, in 1842. And his inaccuracy is on specific things - chronology and self-centering. Otherwise he is often an accurate source.
@@onandagus1 I noticed in your explanation, you didn’t include the possibility that he was lying and this marriage never happened. Why is that?
@@justin-griffin Please re-read what I just wrote above. That the marriage occurred and was performed by Noble was published during Joseph Smith's lifetime - and not by Noble. Others also confirm the marriage. And since, as you reject in true obscurantist fashion, that we have plenty of other evidence that Joseph was marrying women, there's no reason to reject the evidence that this marriage happened.
@@onandagus1 do you believe the evidence for this particular marriage is strong enough to hold up in court?
@@justin-griffin Testimony on it was given in court in the Temple Lot Case. But, to your question, who cares? Historians try to establish what most probably happened in the past, whereas lawyers try to prove things beyond a reasonable doubt. Do I believe that whether Joseph Smith practiced polygamy can stand up in court? Oh yeah.
Thanks!
Is there any way that Don Bradley would come on my show. I won't cut them off after 45 minutes. He can talk for as long as he has the strength to. He is crazy, great with his understanding of our history. So Don, if you're out there. Let me know if you want to do a zoom meeting with me at any time. And we can have a contest on who can talk longer
in our defense, we did over 3 hours with Don. And we plan to do more...
@@WARDRADIO I am trying to fish here for an interview with Don. And if you keep making noise, he will not take the bait. Lol. You guys always do a great job. I was just kind of setting it up for hammer's sake. Keep doing what you're doing because it is working. If you ever get time for me to come on and tell you about my family, I'm my own conversion to the church, just let me know. Again, you guys are the best show on CZcams by far.
Thanks, Arthur. Keep up the good work!
Mic drop.. amazing
Coming up! I'll be on the chat live as it premieres.
I’m on to you Don. My guess is that in this episode you will make some new correlations when there are none. That way you can come up with some new fresh controversial ideas and it will draw more people to your book. I could be wrong but we shall see.
@@Eagle_Powers Proverbs 18:13
Don uses threads instead of ropes. @@Eagle_Powers
Well, compared to such an erudite scholar like you, User, Don is just a novice. Few possess the logical shrewdness that you do.
The Knock on Don is that he "hangs heavy weights on thin threads."
@@WARDRADIO
I'd love to hear an interview with Leiland Tanner pulling in his theories
What are his theories?
Brigham Young was a polygamist, and needed to convince the saints that polygamy originated with Joseph. All the records indicating Joseph engaged in polygamy came after his death when BY strongly encouraged everyone to remember events a certain way. It's all nonsense.
yah, but nah. Joseph definitely revealed plural marriage ... every serious historian knows it.
@@WARDRADIO Certainly, the easy thing is to believe all the evidence suggesting section 132 was revelation from God through Joseph, and recorded by William Clayton. When you begin to examine the credibility of those sources, and the motives they might have to lie, the waters get very muddy very quickly.
yeah, i don't get the "motives" thing. Do you think they liked polygamy? Do you think WE like it? Everyone frickin' hated it. That's where you lose me. EVERYONE hated it. The men hated it THE MOST. So I don't track with your "ew! Think of all they had to gain" argument. It was repulsive and everyone knew it.
Regardless section 132 was definitely from Joseph... We've been over this...
@@WARDRADIO Furthermore, once you understand the true nature of God, you realize that polygamy cannot be of God. Godhood is to create posterity in Eternity, and monogamous marriage establishes the very foundation for that to occur. The creation story teaches that "God's image" is both male and female together, united as one. Perhaps that is why God's name Elohim is a plural term.
Man or woman by themselves can only be half a God. It takes both to create life, and without that, there is no God. Only when husband and wife join together in heart and mind as one flesh can they together become one God. Polygamy destroys the unity of the couple necessary to fill the measure of our creation, and have our companionship sealed up in Godhood.
In ancient days, powerful men were deceived by the adversary into taking multiple wives, and so were men in the Church also deceived in our day. Whether it began with Joseph or Brigham is less important than understanding that plural marriage has never come from God, and never will because it completely destroys God's plan for us.
@@WARDRADIO Nope. Michelle Stone is running well-documented circles around "every serious historian". Try to keep up.
Is it possible these pregnant married women with husbands outside of the church were preparing for death during childbirth which was very common back then? Many women would make out their wills while pregnant just in case of death in childbirth…so in preparation it’s possible they wanted to ensure they made that covenant before birth…just a thought I had.
My grandfather's grandfather, Joseph Ellison Beck, gave the purse of gold to Orson Hyde, so Orson could dedicate the holy land for gospel. Joseph is mentioned as the stranger that made in possible, not by name, in the recorded dedicatory prayer.
When is the next livestream?
@onandagus1 your book just arrived on my porch. Looking forward to diving in. Let me know how else I can support
@ryanfenn5610 Thanks, bro! =D
I heard that they believed that they were sealing families to Jesus and God THROUGH Joseph Smith. So Sealings at that time was basically the means to seal yourself to go and eternal life in one big family.
That's my job, I'm like a witch, laughing, snickering, giggling, cackling, stirring everything up and getting you Anti-Mormons oh so very grumpy. Heh heh, and I am quite successful at it.
Thank you Don for your research and insights! The tide of filthy spewing by critics is rising, but you poked a big hole in the tank with your discoveries of the women Joseph Smith married being pregnant and remaining married to their original spouse.
My opinion for a few decades: Joseph Smith was obsessed with creating a web of sealings in order to make the Church members interconnected through sealings as one big Celestial family.
The evidence showed that he was apposed to being married to anyone but emma but he did it to be obedient to what the Lord commanded.
Technically, once a women is sealed, all her future children belong to the sealed husband. Joseph has a huge posterity.
Wowza! This episode was AMAZING! 🔥
😁
Like the Horus shirt Cardon.
The biggest mistake Don and the rest of the polygamy apologists make is not noticing there are no credible, contemporary (pre-1844) sources actually stating plural marriage is a revealed doctrine.
Additionally, no one from Joseph to Hyrum to Emma actually stated it during that time. Those who believe he practiced and preached polygamy will one day regret how easily they were mislead.
Plural marriage is one thing
Polygamy is a totally different thing
Concubines and harems are yet a totally other thing
And as you lay them out side by side, in the context that they each take place in, you clearly see that they have nothing in common with each other on a heavenly, eternal scale
Only one of these things is heavenly, the others are not
Thank yo
Good news dear brothers. Thank u. Matches appointments of law of adoption of Abrhamic covenant
Don Juan descends from on high… you guys are hilarious. Great answers. I actually think most members who are active in the church don’t even know this. I didn’t.
Another home run episode and this one’s a
GRAND SLAM!!! ✊🏻👏🏻✊🏻
@onandagus1 The end of plural marriage is just as mysterious to me as the beginning of it. If it truly was instituted by God. Do we have good evidence that it was ended by God?
You can read the testimonies of Wilford Woodruff. He also writes about it in his journal. The Lord showed him what would happen to the church if they did not stop the practice. He doesn't say this, but I believe the reason was because they were not progressing in unity, and living the Laws of Stewardship and Consecration. They weren't living the Law of the Priesthood in its fulness as well, which we don't have, but believe we could have if we started living the Laws of Stewardship and Consecration again.
"Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." Wilford Woodruff was the Prophet.
I think the Prophet was scared to actually activate this marriage system, it seems only under the threat of the angel with the drawn sword he tells Zina he's not going to put it off any longer
Is there a discord for ward radio
Yes. Cardon?
I thought some of this was due to a misunderstanding of sealing & that there was a thought that in order to ensure your eternal family, a member of your family had to be sealed to a really righteous member of the church, like a prophet or apostle. And that later one of the prophets said that was no longer necessary and that you just needed to be sealed to your own relatives.
This is so good. I appreciate the true information Thank you so much for doing this. My husband, son, daughter in law, brother (who introduced my family) left the church because of that and more. I need to somehow get them this information. I can’t do it because it would become continuous with us.
Every time someone says "hottest babes in Nauvoo" or "the hottest chicks in Nauvoo" I just crack up.
It's just so weird to think of those women that way. Lol especially considering that Mark Twain thought of LDS women as ugly.
Do we know appx what time Joseph said the angel showed up with sword drawn? Beirut is 7 time zones from New York. It would be reallllly cool to note that the two events (meteor vision) were simultaneous
Don Bradley is sooooo good! Best guest ever.
@user-pt8jt3lb3h Aw thanks!
This is amazing, but what about the other wives that weren’t pregnant?
Doesn't this video totally refute Michelle Stone's claims? I'm curious what a conversation between her and Don Bradley would look like. Don Bradley is a more authoritative source, in my opinion.
No, not even close. Check out Don's recent podcasts with Michelle on 132 Problems. There is disagreement, to be sure, but also mutual respect.
Michelle Stone recently had Denver Snuffer on her show. Hearing a response to this video from Don might be interesting.
Two birds of a feather right there...
Great stuff
This from Van Wagoner adds a lot to the story:
"Brigham Young was [the] one who told him outright his family was not his before sending Jacobs on his mission and taking Zina, citing his spiritual authority as prophet/Joseph’s proxy. In Mormon Polygamy, it states: 'Young wanted Zina D. Huntington Jacobs. Smith had taken her as a plural wife with her husband Jacob's consent while six months pregnant in October 1841 […] she would belong to Joseph Smith in eternity. ' (45)
Then, during the trek west at Mt. Pisgah, Iowa, Young told Jacobs “[T]he woman you claim for a wife does not belong to you. She is the spiritual wife of Brother Joseph, sealed up to him. I am his proxy, and she, in this behalf, with her children are my property. You can go where you please, and get another but be sure to get one of your own kindred spirit." (Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History 2nd Edition, p. 44)
Other contemporaneous accounts of this, I'm not sure if there are, but the fact that Henry was kicked out of his family and wrote love letters to Zina wishing for her makes it seem very credible. Why did Joseph not kick Henry away? Why did suddenly Brigham kick henry out? Why did Brigham have to redo the sealing to joseph if it had already happened? It seems to me because Joseph wasn't married to her to begin with.
Don't feel bad, Anti-Mormons, if you try real hard you will be able to fly around in the clouds for all eternity, and that's cool, man. Nothing wrong with that.
I think Emma knew from the beginning and gave consent, but changed her mind!
💯 That's right. She got jealous and then turned against the principle.😔
Is Don's PPT available somewhere?
No, but I'll be publishing a much more comprehensive version of this.
@@onandagus1
Thanks!
Sorry to make you repeat but you have a website right?
Y’all should do an episode about the 8 passengers story
Between the Daybells and now the Frankes, people are bound to start associating the church with these abusive cults that are started by people who happen to have been LDS
Have you ever wanted something so badly you couldn't see the negative impact?
I haven't finished listening yet but so far It sounds like the prophet found a loophole way to get around the whole polygamy issue that he didn't want to participate in, but that God told him he must! (The whole angel of God threatening to kill him if he wouldn't begin the practice) I wonder if he was so deeply in love with Emma that he did everything he could to avoid hurting her?
LOL. So why was he in the Barn with VERY YOUNG Fanny Alger?
@@krismurphy7711 Are you paying attention to what you're watching? Also, would you be interested in having a conversation sometime?
No matter what you say, Kris just repeats the same debunked slander. You can say: Now we know Fanny was 18! And he'll keep saying she was 14 until judgment day
@@onandagus1 Step out of the accusatory fog. Remember Kris that Don was an atheist anti mormon for ten years. What his incentive in coming back and defending The Prophet? I respect you, but VERY YOUNG is according to our 21 century standards. Back then she was not considered a minor. Plus we have strong evidence that there is not sexual activity with Fanny. Best Wishes
@@landondecoursey1030 Don presented evidence in the last episode that she was 18 too.
I think with somanyconfusing and unknown facts about polygamy and polyandry practiced in the early Saints is to trust that there was more to this than we know and to trust their hearts and desire to do right. There is a lot of perversion and deviance ascribed to this practice but the opposite seems to be true. It's interesting that polygamy being practiced now is is very dysfunctional and self-serving.
Of all the episodes I've done with Ward Radio, THIS WILL BE THE BOMBSHELL!
Don... I'm an active member but the scripture I struggle with the most is D&C 132:64-65. That one really feels greatly of male favoritism/ submission etc.... I have always had a hard time with that and completely disagree with it. But I know sometimes the language back then was different than how we hear things now.
Your instincts are correct. This gave Joseph permission to do whatever he wanted. Regardless of how Emma felt. She should be destroyed according to God if she does not agree with it and even if she doesn’t Joseph could still practice polygamy. Isn’t that convenient?
@@StompMom5 Understood. That's perhaps the most difficult part of D&C 132. I'm doing further work on D&C 132 to understand the whole revelation, including that passage, much better. I can't say that that work will make this passage more palatable, but it will at least make it more understandable in its context. One idea for dealing with this passage would be to understand that Joseph was the one who put his revelations into words, and Joseph was under great stress in the circumstance since - the sources show - Emma was threatening divorce. Under that stress it would make sense that Joseph's own desperation and frustration leaked through into the text he dictated, making it more strident than it should have been.
@@onandagus1 That makes no sense at all. D&C is direct revelation from God. So is it Joseph speaking or God?
@@onandagus1 Nevermind I can answer that. It’s Joseph. Not God. Just Joseph either pretending to hear from God or maybe it’s the Angel of Light (Satan)
8:24 this question is the key question to ask. Plural marriage was a made up teaching. At mass, there was some sort of sincere motive behind it by Brigham and his crew, but at worst, there was a much more nefarious, purpose, and motive at play and Joseph, Emma and Hyrum got caught in the crossfire.
So women could have plural husbands, just like men could have plural wives!