The 2nd Mormon prophet said this about polygamy! 

I think that it was just John Taylor dressed up with a turban on his head and carrying a sword.

@Wh3nth3wick3drul3 It was definitely something like that😅 No righteous angel threatens to destroy a righteous man for not committing adultery🥸. That's outta the movies or fictional books🤣. God does not work that way😇

They even revisionist historied Jacob 3: 5. They took out the plural Fathers and replaced it with the singular father. Which changes everything. This occurred in 1981. My mother in laws 1979 Book of Mormon has the plural "Fathers" and the replica Book of Mormon I have also has the plural "Fathers". But anything after 1981, they revisionist historied Jacob 3: 5

@Wh3nth3wick3drul3 Ugh.... that's so disgusting!

​@@StompMom5: It really is disgusting! Polygamy is false doctrine!

There seems to be no end to the contradictions found in section 132.

I'm researching the differences between the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants and the current Doctrine and Covenants. So far, section 1 of both is the same. Section II of the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants is section 20 of the current Doctrine and Covenants. And section III of the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants is the same as section 107 of the current Doctrine and Covenants.

Exactly! I'm wanting to dig into the ceiling power and show how problematic the polygamists narrative is.

D&C 124, Hyrum was supposed to get the sealing keys after the Nauvoo temple was built. Maybe I missed something?

@@cpatten83 I suggest reading section 124:93-94. I don't see how a different interpretation is possible. It clearly says that Hyrum had been given the sealing power.

You are creating an entirely new narrative. Even people who adamantly argue that polygamy started with Joseph Smith. I'll agree that Hyrum vehemently opposed it until 1843. This record is a contemporaneous record in the unpublished Journal of Levi Richards. You'll have to do a lot better to say that this should be ignored or disregarded, or to try to get people to believe that John Bennett should be considered more credible than this record. I know that you are desperately committed to the idea that polygamy started with Joseph Smith, but at this point you are completely ignoring the actual evidence. And, as I said, making up your own brand new narrative.

@@MichelleBStone " ...and that god would never send an angel..." Michelle that is has huge implications on whether Hyrum believe Joseph was honest. Many people made those claims against Joseph so where is Hyrum's claim?

@@whatsup3270 No idea what you mean with this. Joseph never claimed an angel came and forced him to betray his wife. That story, like all the others, was not reported until decades after his death by the Utah Mormons desperate to tie polygamy to Joseph Smith. Hyrum and Joseph were in perfect agreement.

@@MichelleBStone First: Thank you Michelle. Second: Let me talk about the mechanics of this. And Third: I will launch my complaint. When I take Michelle‘s comment (context) back to the video it changed the meaning entirely. The reason for that was the audience had/has no reason to believe Michelle, Hyrum, and Joseph didn’t believe the angel story. And over and over we see a strange suggestion like this, with no explanation about where the angel story could possibly come from. Usually, Brigham is always blamed and usually that is completely illogical. So, it appears to me in normal context the video makes bogus unsubstantiated claims, then later off video proposes and illogical precept that is not substantiated. This is very common in the videos. Sometimes I think she is just going too fast and jumping subjects thus she may not have intended to link those subjects, and other times it is like this where you did intend to link the subjects but with an illogical connection. I don’t expect an answer but who benefited from the angel story? And where is the fact that these denials are rebuttals to public printing of the practice of polygamy in Nauvoo by Joseph Smith? Isn’t it kind of important to acknowledge that John C Bennett was publicly exposing polygamy, and these are Joseph’s retorts being delivered through Hyrum? Additionally, the D&C 124, referenced, well that was made public by John C Bennett, funny who believed John C Bennett then. Hang in there I’m not against you or the Church, I just don’t agree with you on this subject.

Hyrum's sermons actually wasn't about Bennett. Just like his later April 8 1844 sermon, it was directed to people in the church who were falling for and spreading the teachings of spiritual wifery/polygamy that both he and Joseph so strongly opposed. You are welcome to look up Levi Richards journal and read it for yourself. Please show me what evidence you see to claim it is responding to Bennett.

This is actually a different speech! Which shows just how consistently Joseph and Hyrum both preached against polygamy. The one that Joseph Smith papers deleted was given April 8th 1844. This one was May 14th 1843, and was never even included in any church history. They never even added it to the Joseph Smith papers, presumably because it was given by Hyrum, so I guess they assume it isn't relevant to Joseph. And I'm sure most people promoting the standard narrative would prefer to also keep this speech under wraps. I think it is amazing to see just how many documents we have that reveal the truth.