Michelle Stone had me choking pretty quickly when she essentially said she was receiving revelation from the plural wives of a previous generation. That’s not Satan’s “A” team managing that project. Why do we have these problematic issues of Polygamy, the Priesthood Ban, and the rest?. Why wouldn’t God just make the truth perfectly palatable all the time so we could convert and retain everyone?. Why can’t we just have all the details of history to contradict the critics?. Heavenly Father puts stumbling blocks in our way for His own good reasons. Stumbling blocks trip the lukewarm but are stepping stones to those who persist in faith. How many people would finish reading the Book of Mormon if God had just left out the Isaiah chapters of 2 Nephi?. God is always building us, He knows we need to be challenged and to do our faith work.
Thank you so much for this. I have personally wrestled with and have been on a roll coaster ride over the polygamy issue. Right away, however, I recognized Michelle Stone as an apostate who has led so many astray. I hope and pray many of her followers find this video and have a change of heart before its to late. I am finally at peace.
I don’t remember any of these critics or deserters being called as prophets, seers, or revelators. They were never sustained by the body of the church as such. They have no authority to dictate church doctrine, or sit in judgement of the prophets. They certainly don’t get to tell God what His laws are and when or what He commands.
Great episode! Why is this even a controversy? The evidence is overwhelming that Joseph did introduce plural marriage in this dispensation under the direction of the Lord. I love it when David waxes eloquent with his astounding indepth knowledge of the Bible. Go David !
53:54 good point, and conversely I’d point out that the early dissenters who fought against the prophet’s teaching on polygamy and the churches they started - their fruit is drying up on the vine.
My third great aunt is Lucy Walker, one of Joseph’s wives who testified in the Temple Lot deposition. I’ve never thought twice about Joseph’s involvement in plural marriage because we’ve always known Lucy’s story. I also think it’s a glorious blessing to all of us because we are here and strong because of it!
I grew up in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. When we bought our home… a home built in the late 1800’s we found an old copy of the Book of Mormon from the 1800s. Makes me wonder if the Strangites brought that copy. Anyway… I always thought that was amazing that we bought the home and found the book. What are the odds in this small college town with so few members of the church living there that pioneer descendants (polygamist descendants too) … would find this treasure ❤❤
I love these interviews with Brian Stutzman :) - Thanks to both of you for having these interesting and informative discussions together. Brian is a great choice to have these discussions with. Saints Unscripted has also come out with great discussions with Brian Hales on this topic of polygamy, as well as Ward Radio's discussions with Don Bradley. I have learned a lot from all of these.
I have never heard those that deny polygamy ever question whether Joseph Smith Jr. gave Doctrine And Covenants 28, 43 or 107. In both D&C 28 and 43 God says that there would be another appointed to replace Joseph Smith Jr. as the only one who can receive commandments and revelations for God's Church, and in 43 it says that if Joseph Smith Jr. falls away, the only power he would have would be to appoint a replacement. Joseph Smith Jr. remained the President of this Church until his death, so nothing he instituted could have been contrary to God's will. In D&C 107: 22-26 we are told that the 12 Apostles together are equal in authority to the Presidency of this Church, and that the Seventy together are equal in authority to the 12 Apostles. And in D&C 107: 27 we are told that with a UNANIMOUS decision each group could set Church doctrine. However in D&C 107: 30 it says that these decisions must be done in righteousness. And as unusual as this is for a church, which couldn't even pull off a unanimous decision, let alone have a lower group make decisions for a church, in D&C 107: 32 it says that if any of these groups has made an unrighteous decision the other groups can get together and again with a UNANIMOUS decision can overturn the unrighteous decisions. And finally in D&C 107: 28 is says that if the full groups can't be assembled, a majority with a unanimous decision is valid. Why did I say all this? Because after the death of Joseph Smith Jr. the majority of those remaining of the 12 Apostles assembled together and UNANIMOUSLY appointed Brigham Young as the successor to Joseph Smith Jr. So even if Brigham Young had instituted polygamy himself, as the one God promised to succeed Joseph Smith Jr. he could only have done it on orders from God, or he would have had to call someone to replace himself, which he didn't. Those who deny polygamy are saying God lied to Joseph Smith Jr. or Joseph Smith Jr. was a false prophet and The Book Of Mormon false, meaning it cannot be used as evidence against polygamy. And since the Bible only possibly forbids polygamy to Bishops, Deacons and Kings of Israel, or only limits it, and since the Bible gives instructions on how to practice polygamy, and since the Bible indirectly commands polygamy under very specific circumstances, those opposed to polygamy can't use the Bible either as evidence against polygamy.
You mentioned the bible teaching where it says that a Bishop must have 1 wife. Brigham Young clarified this, and taught that that scripture actually means that a bishop must have at least a wife, that he must not be a single man without a wife. He thought that he is to be the father of the ward and that cannot be so if he is not married. So he taught that we interpret that verse to mean that a bishop must have at least one wife, and are not forbid from having more. But that a man should not be called to be Bishop who is not married. Just a little tidbit I thought you might be interested in! Take care!
Thank you for this discussion. I'm a convert of 46 years and personally wondered about the polygamy issue over the years. Regardless of what a good example of the Church you are to the non-member family members around you, this "issue" never completely goes away, and can serve as an easy point of rejection of the restored gospel, unfortunately.
Brian is right. unauthorized plural marriage being shunned by the Lord is the key. Jesus said so Himself. Jacob2 28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts. 29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes. 30 *For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things* I might add... those who say otherwise are partaking in priestcraft!!
@@GarySaint-xm6tr Well we can count on Laman's party sure did. Along with Amerindian converts.. that's one of the reasons the Lamanites always greatly out numbered the Nephites from day one.
After the everlasting covenant of sealing was restored, many women were being sealed to Joseph Smith but not married to him-they considered sealing (celestial) and marriage (mortal) two different and separate rites. Fathers were bringing their daughters to him to be sealed because they feared their daughters would not find an active young man in the church to marry and would miss out on being “sealed up unto eternal life.” In their minds, they were securing a place next to the Prophet in the Celestial Kingdom! Even my 4th-great-grandmother, during the last days in Nauvoo, was at the temple being sealed to the late Joseph Smith whom she revered, instead of to her husband. Therefore, Joseph is sealed to hundreds, but maybe only entered into a few plural marriages. The Lord had set up laws governing the plurality of wives. We must not judge anything according to our times. I've been enjoying your channel since March 2023-Marilyn
Hi again David! Hope you're well. This was such a well done discussion! If you'd ever want a crash course on the early Pioneer perspectives on this subject, I wholly recommend our playlist called "Celestrial/Patriarchal Marriage"! I say crash course but theres like 30 videos in it now. Its super interesting their perspectives back then and how they approached the docterines in it. I just love what you're doing here with your channel and the Spirit you bring with your testimony.
David, I'd love to see you get hooked up with a VIP trip to the family history library! You might have latter-day saint relatives that you aren't aware of. Both Pastor Jeff and David Boice found latter-day saints in their family lines that they hadn't known about 😊
I loved President Oaks talk about kingdoms of glory, especially when he mentioned that no person would or could ever be forced into a celestial or sealing relationship. It solidified my heart with how polygamy can be a beautiful thing and a higher level of law, but how it would require so much sacrifice to get to the level of understanding through developing the spiritual characteristics and attributes that we are striving to learn through our covenant relationship with Heavenly Father and the Savior through temple worship. A beautiful doctrine that Sarah truly did give Hagar to Abraham. Sarah was not forced into such a situation, but rather was blessed because she had developed those characteristics and attributes and could see the promises of God through celestial living.
The way this controversy has evolved is so weird to me. If you had told me 30 years ago that faithful church members would be arguing that Joseph Smith did indeed practice polygamy, and it would be those on the fringes arguing that he did not, I would have said you were crazy. I grew up in the church, graduated from seminary and institute, diligently cross-referenced every conference talk with my scriptures, and served 3/4 if my mission before I ever heard (from an investigator) that Joseph practiced it. I adamantly denied it at first. I thought it was an anti-mormon lie. But it sure did make section 132 make a lot more sense.
3 Nephi 11:28 ". . . neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been. 29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another. 30 Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger, one against another; but this is my doctrine, that such things should be done away." Jesus Christ
Or, in the words of a fallible mortal, Did I miss something? Did David Alexander post derisive, contemptuous, patronizing remarks on any anti-polygamy website comment lines, such as have been used when addressing him on his own channel's page?
I know that plural marriage is one of the most holy and ennobling doctrines! I hope that someday I will be found worthy to be sealed to either Joseph Smith or Jesus Christ.
Mosiah 5:15 "Therefore, I would that ye should be steadfast and immovable, always abounding in good works, that Christ, the Lord God Omnipotent, may seal you his, that you may be brought to heaven, that ye may have everlasting salvation and eternal life, through the wisdom, and power, and justice, and mercy of him who created all things, in heaven and in earth who is God above all. Amen."
We still need to do a zoom call sometime david. But to answer your question yes I am a descendant of the polygamy lines myself. I'm a descendant of George A Smith the founder of St George utah. George was the cousin to Joseph Smith and he was one of the first members of the 70.
Plural marriage is a Hot topic you all Abraham was called to be a father of many nations and how did the Lord work this out? Gen 17:55 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee In part He started with Hagar. The Lord even sent her back to Abraham. Gen16:9 And the angel of the Lord said unto her, Return to thy mistress, and submit thyself under her hands. 10 And the angel of the Lord said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude. 11 And the angel of the Lord said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the Lord hath heard thy affliction. Gen 21:12 ¶ And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called. 13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed. Take care now
I’m so grateful to see men of God stand up for the high and holy practice of polygamy! Because of what I have learned, if I had the choice between living monogamy and polygamy, I would choose polygamy. I only hope that one day I will be worthy to plural like Jesus Christ or Joseph Smith.
Some of these people who are denying that Joseph Smith, instituted and practiced polygamy are even claiming that the story about Hagar and Ishmael is unreliable and probably didn’t really happen because Abraham was righteous, so of course he wouldn’t have ever been with another woman.
Did you ever think that you may have volunteered in the pre-existance to come in that line so they would have a link to be found and have their Temple work done, when otherwise they would be left out from receiving that blessing opportunity?
I appreciate the story of Jacob and I just had an impression. It must have been Father as no one had been resurrected yet so all messengers other than Father would not have had bodies to wrestle with Jacob unless the wrestling was other than physical, even divine investiture would not have made wrestling possible physically
I believe academics have postulated the translation of 'wrestled with' could have more closely translated as 'wrestled in front of'. It would make more sense if he was wrestling his own conscience in front of God. Perhaps similar to Alma when he became humbled (Alma 36:12-17).
I have not heard this before, @@jilldowding-walker8066. Scholar Dan McClellan agrees with the scholarly consensus that it is meant to be a literal wrestle. If you try to turn it into figurative language, that'd applying modern understanding to an ancient verse. It's not correct. But yknow, as long as you get something good from it.
The level of love and unselfishness required to successfully live the principle of plural marriage is great. There are apparently many who are unwilling to make that sacrifice and subsequently receive the blessings offered. I belive that in order to receive a firm testimony of the principle, you have to be willing to accept and live it if called on to do so. I believe there is more to both Jacob stories in the bible and the book of mormon than is actually written. The bible says that Jacob hated Leah. However true ,this may have been in the beginning, because of her participation in the deception of labon, his later actions at least, indicate respect and probably love. Why would you continue to have children with someone you hated? Not logical. Jacob says the Lord delights in the chastity of women. Marriage does not break the law of chastity, but fornication and adultry does. I beieve the jews were abusing the law of marriage. Marrying other women and abandoning their responsibilities to their first wives solely for lustful purposes. Thus they were divorcing or abandoning their wives and by their actions making their previous wife vulnerable to temptation and heart break. Just my opinion, but i think there are some underlying circumstances occuring here that were not fully explained.
In both my and my husband's family history in those early days of the Church, husbands who had more than one wife abandoned and neglected the wives and children. There was a lot of selfishness of many of the husbands in those days, and that's why Wilford Woodruff saw in vison what he did. This is not taught of course, but the Lord gave the men a chance to start living the Order of Enoch for 40 years, even telling BY to establish it in 1874, which in my opinion would have included the sharing of wives, which is becoming "one in all things" and "heavenly things" after they would have covenanted to be one in earthly things. The women had their chance, and many rose to the occasion. But it is wickedness to have one man or woman above another.
@@tanyarobinson1146 maybe this was what Jesus was talking about when he condemned divorce. This practice was still being done in his day, they were not fully adhering to tne requirements, in other words they were not fully divorced and as such buth would commit adultery if they remarried before fulfilling their obligation. Do you have a source for this information? Interesting...
Honestly, the best approach is to ignore the deniers. The evidence is overwhelming and the fruits glorious. Let them seethe. That said, I do question the need to belabor this point, and I question the usefulness of videos like these.
Hi Clint. You are certainly free to "question the usefulness" of the video....but if you want to be in reality....over 4,000 people watched it...and 76 thought it worthy of comment....and pretty much all the comments but yours....were from people who found it helpful; and of the many hundreds who chose to "like" the video or "dislike" it.....the ratio of "liked" to "disliked" was 99 to 1. 99 percent of those who gave it a thumbs up...or a thumbs down...gave it a thumbs up. So your opinion is yours to give...but you are seriously in a tiny, tiny minority. Which is fine. But don't expect me to value your 1% negative input...over the 99% positive. Much love, David
@@davidmalvinalexander please don’t misunderstand me- I find the topic valuable and the point irrefutable. It’s just that my feed has been filled with an inordinate number of faithful videos citing the evidence. I just wish we’d spend less time trying to prove that he did it and more time focusing on the benefits of him doing it.
Joseph Smith introduced the plans for plural unions of matrimony for the afterlife. Even if he was setting up the reality of it being needed to bring up seed unto and for the survival of the Lord's church, Joseph never had the opportunity to practice it physically because they murdered him before he had the opportunity.
This subject makes me so uncomfortable. It WAS a part of our religion, I know that, and it doesn’t bother me too much, that it was practiced back it the day. But it’s over now, right? And who is keeping the polygamy flame burning? Those who say they don’t believe Joseph Smith ever taught or lived it. Why are they so bothered by it? They don’t have to live it. None of have to live EVER, if we don’t want to. I know I sure don’t. So I guess what I’m saying is, I wish it would just go away.
We still practice it in a way, and certainly believe it will be so in heaven. If a man dies and he is sealed to his wife, can his wife be sealed to another, well no. If a woman dies and she was sealed to her husband can he be sealed to a second wife. Yes.
Sorry David. I’m moving past all these. The church is true. The prophet is real. I don’t care what anyone says. I’ll tell them to their face that I love them, but they are being led down a path that is not towards the tree of life. I will be kind, & I will help them back, if they desire. But if not, I will bid them good bye… Peace…
Totally understand. I don't enjoy addressing this stuff....if the Saints would all just cling to the Prophet and his Counselors and the Quorum of 12 and trust them...I wouldn't even need to address such things. Much love, David
We can do almost everything as a spirit that we can do with a body. Christ created heaven and earth as a Spirit. Jeremiah was sanctified and ordained as a spirit. Lazarus and the rich man recognized each other as spirits, and felt eother comfort of joy, we sang and shouted for joy as spirits, fought in a war as spirits. WE ABSOLUTELY DO NOT NEED A BODY. For us to want a body there would have to be an ability added that we dont already have as spirits. The only abilities a body adds to us is the ability to eat, the ability to drink, and the ability to copulalte. God did not need to give us the ability to copulalte to create bodies for His spirit children. How was Adam and Eve's bodies created? How were all the fish and bread created Jesus used to feed all the people from two fish? The very reason we are morysl prior to becoming immortal is to prove we can be trusted with an immortal body that has sexual organs. A Celestial body is a body that is immortal that has sexual organs. A Terrestrial or Telestial body is a body that is immortal, but does not have sexual organs. Adam and Eve were male and female, flesh and bones, had sexual organs, and were married in the presence of God. During the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth, there will be many Adams and many Eves, but there will not be fornication or Adultery, because those with Celestial bodies during the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth will have lived the law of Chastity as mortals. 25 percent of married men commit adultery. 15 percent of maried women. What is our heavenly Father going to do with the unbalance of women to men who have Celestial bodies?
Loving living God of Miracles and creator of haven and earth, in control of all His creation, the human way is not the Lord, His are higher than ours, His will be done, Prural in the Lord's is all well done, until we do Prural marriage in our way, is wrong, was just like David and Uriahs wife, Bashepa
