William Marks, a Victim of Polygamy

[@JacobIsBell]

I super appreciate giving full quotes with proper context. The quote found at 7:48 seconds into the video where WM claims JS said “I have been deceived” could reasonably be understood as Joseph Smith saying “ I have been lied to” as opposed to any admission of involvement in polygamy.

[@JacobIsBell]

I’m 14:00 into the video. WM is again expressing that Joseph is determined to eliminate polygamy. But no indication that Joseph is involved in the teaching or practice of polygamy in any form.

[@JacobIsBell]

23:00 the Mark Forscutt quote. This is the weakest so far. Third hand account 20+ years after the alleged conversation. I totally appreciate you, including it in this presentation, but it would be worthwhile to indicate which citations you find to be most breathable.

[@JacobIsBell]

24:25 the video asserts“ in the letter, William Marks makes six distinct claims.“ If you are referring to the Mark Forscutt, that is not a letter from William Marks. MF claims WM told him JS entered into polygamy with JCB. Thirdhand account 20+ years after this alleged event. The documents directly from William Marques say Joseph Smith admitted “I was deceived”, possibly by those who were the practitioners of polygamy. Now that you are using a third account, it has changed to Joseph admitting he entered into polygamy. Joseph Smith the polygamist seems to grow as you use citations further away from the actual event and the people allegedly involved.

[@JacobIsBell]

26:05 “William Marks is always consistent that Joseph [Smith] was involved in polygamy.” Not according to the citations you have used in this presentation so far. William Marks consistently claims Joseph said “I have been deceived”. That is something quite different than Joseph Smith being involved in the practice or teaching of polygamy.

[@JacobIsBell]

28:00 John Jawley… do you see the transition in what is claimed about Joseph Smith as you begin using thirdhand accounts instead of the secondhand accounts from William Marks?

[@personofinterest8731]

Thank you so much for this. I have long believed that Wm Marks was an honest, solid man. I hope Michelle Stone sees and hears this podcast. From South Africa, 🇿🇦 with love.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

Thank you. I like Marks. I see no reason to disbelieve him automatically. He was a man of honor and honesty.

[@randyjordan5521]

Unfortunately, Michelle Stone is a zealot who only believes information which confirms her preconceived beliefs, and she rejects the mountain of evidence which refutes her.

[@icecreamladydriver1606]

"He said that he would go before the congregation and proclaim against it, and I must go into the High Council, and he would prefer charges against those in transgression, and I must sever them from the church,..." This statement doesn't sound like Joseph was guilty of the crime of polygamy but rather had learned that those who had told him they were not practicing it actually were practicing it.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

What was going to stop him from saying he did it, was sorry, and now they needed to change? William Marks said polygamy was introduced as a principle of exaltation. Do you really think Brigham would do this and Joseph wouldn't care? William Marks said Joseph had done wrong. How was he wrong? William Marks said Joseph had been deceived. What was he wrong and deceived about? William Marks mentioned the conversation to the Twelve. Why would he do this if they were the guilty ones? William Marks said Joseph mentioned polygamy would be an advantage to the church. Why would he do this if he originally thought it was wrong?

[@steveambrose2349]

All this historic trash about the Mormons shows just how fake this church really is. All these distractions of so-called doctrines of God are nothing more than evidence showing that Jesus Christ is but a “hiss and a byword” in this church. This church was established to make money and gain power over people. If the church would allow all of its history to come to light (and I mean all of it), the members would then see the fraud President Hinckley spoke of in general conference back in 2003. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is nothing more that an attempt to persuade people to live yet another religion based on a theme of salvation. Faith in something is great. To claim that this particular faith is based in fact is the fraud.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism Not to mention the fact that William Marks was in the Nauvoo High Council meeting on August 12, 1843, during which Hyrum Smith presented the revelation on celestial marriage to seek the council's approval to sustain it as church doctrine. Marks, his counselor Austin Cowles, and high councilor Leonard Soby all opposed the measure. That was the very incident that started the organized opposition to polygamy, William Law's part in that opposition, the publication of the "Nauvoo Expositor," and which culminated in Joseph's and Hyrum's deaths. So DUH! yeah, William Marks knew that Joseph Smith originated and practiced polygamy.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism Just to let you know: The "icecreamladydriver" you're responding to is a regular commenter on Michelle Stone's "132 Problems With Polygamy" channel. She and Michelle are "Joseph Smith Polygamy Deniers." They worship Joseph Smith, and they are not at an intellectual, emotional, or psychological state in which they can rationally examine the facts and draw obvious conclusions. So that is why "icecreamladydriver" is unable to intelligently address your questions here.

[@Sayheybrother8]

@@randyjordan5521be honest, 132 isn’t about celestial marriage it is about polygamy Full stop, period.

[@zrosix2240]

Something to be noted, both Joseph and Hyrums most well known extreme anti polygamy rhetoric occurred within weeks of their deaths (Joseph smiths most well known “what a thing it is for a man to be accused of having many wives” and saying anyone who teaches such a thing needs their license removed, being in late may 1844, while hyrums was in April 1844) lines up perfectly with marks’ claim that Joseph was regretting introducing polygamy at this time, and his claim that Joseph said he was going to publicly denounce the practice (which he did just days before this supposed meeting) It also correlates with how Brigham said he has no memory of Joseph ever denying polygamy, as Brigham was not in nauvoo at the time these addresses were given

[@randyjordan5521]

Joseph made that denial of polygamy three days after William Law had filed charges against him of "living in an open state of adultery with Maria Lawrence." I suggest you read an article titled "Joseph Smith’s Indictment for Adultery and Fornication" by John Dinger. It's on the internet. Putting those events in context: William Law, Austin Cowles, and a few other church leaders had been pleading with Joseph Smith to renounce and abolish polygamy since the previous August, which was when Hyrum presented the "revelation" before the Nauvoo High Council. Those men had their fortunes invested in the Nauvoo community, and they knew that the exposure of Joseph's "spiritual wife" practice would bring it all crashing down. And Joseph knew that if he was forced to step down as church president and city mayor, that HIS entire empire would come crashing down. So instead of admitting to polygamy, renouncing it, and taking his medicine, he foolishly continued to deny it and blame the reports on "false accusers." His unwise order to demolish the "Nauvoo Expositor" press on June 10 was his final desperate attempt to evade responsibility for his sins and crimes. He was arrested for that crime, and was killed 17 days later. So his own foolish, haughty actions precluded his ability to renounce and abolish polygamy.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

This is a really good observation that I didn't think about before. It could be Joseph stretched the truth originally in order to give himself some time to think essentially. Then he was actually quite opposed to it because he personally saw the damage it had done. This would be a more nuanced approach instead of saying he was always lying or always against it.

[@randyjordan5521]

That is correct, and keep in mind that Joseph and Hyrum made those strong denials just after William Law had filed charged of adultery and fornication against Joseph. So the context of those denials is that Joseph and Hyrum were desperately trying to hold onto power. They mistakenly believed that they could cast Law and the other polygamy dissidents as liars and triators. But when those dissidents published the "Nauvoo Expositor" on June 7, Joseph realized that he couldn't counter those factual details and legal affidavits contained in it. So he made the unwise desperation move to order the newspaper's printing press destroyed so that it couldn't publish any more damning details. And that bad move brought about his and Hyrum's deaths.

[@americanmanstan2381]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism This video, your comments, as well as the subject matter itself on both sides - lots of conjecture. I realize now that I've spent too much time on this topic, so I can only imagine what people who research, write, & produce on it have spent. Is it worth it? Time for me to move on from this channel and others like it. Seems like you question everything, which is your prerogative. I certainly do when it comes to religion. To me, the only subject matter relevant in these last days is getting closer to Christ so I can know what to do now, and when the tribulations come. Thanks for helping me realize that. Maybe it's just a coincidence it has come at this moment. If you want to publicly, "figure things out" on that path, well that's the path I'm interested in anyway. Until then, happy trails.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

@@americanmanstan2381 Since we weren't there then yes of course its conjecture just like all studies of history are. This however is probably 95% William Marks' own words so I would hardly call it conjecture. It sounds like you want to "figure things out" however only if they agree with your conclusions. This is understandable. However, a search for truth is a search for God. If you want to understand how to grow "closer to Christ" then you don't need self-proclaimed prophets that denigrate those that listen to them, you just need to study the Sermon on the Mount. If you're worried about the polygamy debate, then I agree with you. I view polygamy as a false God that has sucked too many people into its grasp.

[@carolyearsley]

My children, on their Mormon father's side, are related to Smith's good buddy Levi Hancock, their fifth great uncle. His son Mosiah Hancock, who kept meticulous family records, in his addition to Levi's autobiography indicates that Smith did indeed practice polygamy. Levi records how he and Smith made a deal. Smith would get Clarissa Reed for him as a wife if Levi would get Fanny Alger for him. Levi proceeded to help her climb out of her window in the middle of the night. He then transported her to Smith in a produce wagon. When Fanny began showing from her pregnancy is when Emma threw her out of the household. This has been played down as just an affair, or that she and Emma were at odds in other ways. But the whole point of polygamy was to spread the genes of these men who were related to European royalty, and prevent commoners from doing so. Is says such in the addition I mentioned. They referred to themselves as being of noble blood.

[@carolyearsley]

Also, the men called themselves the "worthies", which is where the use of the term being "worthy" came from. Levi was a rather ruthless character. No wonder three of his five wives divorced him. More info on him can be found in a wiki search for his name.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

Thank you for this information. I know there were certainly a lot of unsavory characters during that time.

[@carolyearsley]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism You're welcome, and Smith was definitely one of them.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism "I know there were certainly a lot of unsavory characters during that time." True. And Joseph Smith surrounded himself with those unsavory characters. Think about that.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

@@randyjordan5521 "True. And Joseph Smith surrounded himself with those unsavory characters." It is interesting because as Joseph changed the laws of Nauvoo to prevent his extradition to Missouri, he inadvertently created a criminal haven. Criminals knew that they wouldn't be extradited and were safe in Nauvoo. I want to research this subject more because it is very fascinating.

[@GeorgeDemetz]

He was right about polygamy starting with Joseph, but it never seemed to sink in his dumb head that it was right!!!

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

Polygamy, if it is right, seems impossible to live outside of a celestial realm.

[@GeorgeDemetz]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism Difficult, but that is one purpose that we are here, to try to progress to the highest level of the CK where there is no envy.

[@Seek_Ye_Shall_Find]

I love your work, keep it up. Thank you so much.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

Thanks.

[@andrewreed4216]

I would live to see an episode on the nemenhah records. Book.Second complete edition. And how our church leaders rejected and hid this knowledge from the public and are getting rid of other Indian artefacts yet profess the native Americans to be the very people they support

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

That would be interesting. I am not sure what I think about those records. Need to study it more.

[@Wytebiker]

do you have a list of your sources?

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

There is a link in the description with all the sources. All my videos always have a link in the description to the sources. The last two sources are in the RLDS or BYU archives and would have to be pulled.

[@randyjordan5521]

Just about everything discussed in this video is on the internet.

[@Commenter2121]

What are your thoughts on the 1865 meeting minutes where Marks confirms that Hyrum read the revelation to the high council, as it pertains to Hyrum being taught about polygamy? It’s clear that Hyrum goes to Joseph and learns of polygamy from him, according to Marks. Yet, Brigham is very clear that he was the one to teach Hyrum about polygamy. Which one is lying? There are many contradictions from the polygamists on who taught them the doctrine, where they were, how they came to accept it, who was at their sealing, who performed their sealing etc. I appreciate that you are bringing these less known sources to the surface because I think this needs to be examined from all sources available.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

Polygamy is honestly such a mess. I could spend my life looking into it and never scratch the surface. When looking at things like this then I think it is important to look at two things. 1. The speaker's history of honesty 2. The speaker's reasons to lie William Marks certainly was known for having a history of honesty and he had no reason to lie about this. This certainly doesn't mean we should automatically believe it. However, it means we should at least consider it. Brigham though had a history of lying and distorting things. He also had a strong reason to lie about this. If he was the one to tell Hyrum about such a grand and glorious doctrine, then he would be seen as a closer confidant to Joseph than his own brother. In many ways I think Brigham was jealous of Joseph and the implicit trust people had in him. Brigham had to earn respect out of fear, while Joseph naturally had people flock to him.

[@Commenter2121]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism Polygamy causes nothing but confusion and is a convoluted mess. Your answer is very reasonable. People need to try and deal with what Marks said but I agree completely on Brigham. He had a lot of audacity to place himself as a better friend to Joseph than Hyrum was. Lies upon lies and it’s so hard to know when people like him, Kimball, Taylor, Clayton, JFS etc were telling the truth. Motivation and context is incredibly important in this discussion.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism "Brigham though had a history of lying and distorting things. He also had a strong reason to lie about this. If he was the one to tell Hyrum about such a grand and glorious doctrine, then he would be seen as a closer confidant to Joseph than his own brother." William Clayton's journal entries make it clear that Hyrum was in the room when Joseph dictated the revelation to Clayton. And William Law's affidavit of May 4, 1844, corroborates Clayton's journal: "I hereby certify that Hyrum Smith did, (in his office) read to me a certain written document, which he said was a revelation from God, he said that he was with Joseph when it was received." William Law could not have known on May 4, 1844 that Hyrum was present during the dictation of the document unless Hyrum himself told him that. This demonstrates that Clayton's journal is authentic and is a correct account of the events of July 12, 1843. Hyrum enthusiastically accepted the revelation and offered to present it to Emma Smith to try to persuade her of its authenticity, which of course failed. Hyrum then presented the revelation to the Nauvoo High Council one month to the day later. So the bottom line being, Hyrum was in the know and on board with plural marriage from the day Joseph presented it to him.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@Commenter2121 If Brigham Young, John Taylor, or William Clayton never existed, that would not magically wash away the evidence which clearly shows that Joseph Smith originated and practiced polygamy. There were about 100 other people in Nauvoo besides those three men whom Joseph or Hyrum had introduced to polygamy, and every one of them stated that they heard it from Joseph or Hyrum. The first published report of polygamy was Martha Brotherton's letter of July 13, 1842. She stated that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young personally introduced plural marriage to her, and that Smith tried to pressure her into plural marrying Young. Also, two church members published accounts of Joseph Smith's proposition to Nancy Rigdon mere weeks after it occurred in 1842. So the entire theory that Young, Taylor, Clayton, or anyone else other than Joseph Smith originated and practiced polygamy against Joseph's teachings is just conspiracy theorist nonsense. The only thing required to accept that Joseph Smith originated polygamy is to accept that he lied when he denied it.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

@@randyjordan5521 This may be true. When studying church history I get whip lash because it is a massive he said, she said situation. A lot of people agree on something, and a lot of other people agree on something else. A lot of people also say there was a revelation on eternal marriage, but not polygamy. A lot of other people say there was a revelation on ancient plural marriage, but not current plural marriage. Because it is so messy I really can't take a firm stance. However, I can certainly say that polygamy seems wrong and we, as a people, shouldn't do it until God gives us more guidance.

[@prophetcentral]

This is still a very poor case for pinning polygamy on Joseph. I think your conclusions and interpretations of the data is a bit off. Trying to correlate a third-party man's statements years after the fact is never going to get you to the whole truth.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

I think you misunderstood. I never said it was conclusive. I actually am pretty sure I said 2 or 3 times that we shouldn't automatically believe William Marks, but just take it into consideration. If this was the only evidence then, yes the case is very weak. However, this is not the only evidence, but just one additional piece of evidence. William Marks had no reason to lie about this and was also known as a rock-solid man of honesty. Therefore, I certainly think his consistent testimony should be taken into consideration.

[@randyjordan5521]

I suggest that you read my comments and historical documentation in other posts here. Pay particular attention to the fact that former Nauvoo high councilors David Fullmer and Thomas Grover testified that William Marks was in the high council meeting of August 12, 1843, during which Hyrum Smith presented the revelation on celestial marriage to seek the council's sustaining vote. That means that Marks was well aware that "celestial marriage" was the product of Joseph Smith. Also, Marks' 1853 statement is corroborated by what we know was happening at the time from numerous other contemporary sources. Marks was regarded as being very honest. That's one of the reasons he was made the Nauvoo stake president. Marks believed in Joseph and the restoration; he simply opposed Joseph's polygamy practice. His counselor, Austin Cowles, also opposed polygamy. Cowles was regarded as one of the "best men in the place." Cowles was indignant because his own daughter, Elvira Ann, who was the Relief Society treasurer under Emma Smith, had "plural married" Joseph Smith. Cowles, like William Marks and William Law, knew that if polygamy was not stamped out, that it could bring down the church and the Nauvoo community. Those men had their fortunes invested in Nauvoo, and that is why they all tried to persuade Joseph Smith to renounce and abolish polygamy. Unfortunately, because church leaders and scholars know that they have to maintain the image of Joseph as being the "prophet of God," they have slandered those men as being dishonest, sinners, and criminals, when in fact, Joseph Smith was the one in the wrong.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

@@randyjordan5521 One thing I have noticed is that to make Joseph "clean" of this then you have to assume a lot of people are lying. I think it is easier to just assume Joseph was a man like everyone else and had good days and bad days. Some of these bad days may have gone too far.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism That's a point that I have made to Michelle Stone and her fans many times. In order to believe that Smith did not originate polygamy, you have to believe that more than 100 people falsely stated that he did. Those people included the 100 or so who accepted and practiced polygamy, as well as another dozen or so who opposed it and spoke out against it. You have to believe that those people on opposite sides of the issue conspired with each other to tell a common lie about Joseph, and keep that lie going for the rest of their lives. As an example, Mary Rollins Lightner still maintained that Joseph introduced her to polygamy and that she was plural married to him, and she still told that story when she spoke at Brigham Young Academy in 1905. There was no reason for the elderly Mary Rollins to keep up a lie about the man whom she revered as the "prophet of the restoration" 61 years after his death. I suggest you read the article "Identifying the Earliest Mormon Polygamists, 1841-1844" by Gary James Bergera.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism Yes, that's what Michelle Stone and her fellow travelers repeat over and over: "Joseph, Hyrum, and Emma were the only honest people involved in this. Everybody else lied about it!" I have replied to Michelle that in order to believe that, she has to posit that the 100 or so people who claimed that they were taught plural marriage by Joseph and accepted it, and the dozen or so people who rejected it and vocally opposed it, all had to collude with each other to concoct a common lie about Joseph and Hyrum and maintain that lie for the rest of their lives. To believe Michelle's version of events, you have to believe that Martha Brotherton, John C. Bennett, Brigham Young, John Taylor, Willard Richards, Wilford Woodruff, Sarah Pratt, William Law, Austin Cowles, Leonard Soby, George W. Robinson, Oliver Olney, and Ebenezer Robinson were all on the same team.

[@TheyWereInOne]

You have done a lot of research, but make conclusions and assumptions that are not as obvious as you purport. There is nowhere in any of the documents you read where Joseph admits, or William says that Joseph was practicing polygamy. You failed to read the section of the letters where Joseph tells William to go to the high council and "Joseph would prefer charges against those in transgression (of polygamy), and he must sever them from the church, unless they made ample SATISFACTION." Does that sound like Joseph was practicing polygamy if he was going to excommunicate anyone who was practicing it? This would have included himself. In reference to William’s quote: “Therefore when the doctrine of polygamy was introduced into the church as a principle of exaltation, I took a decided stand against it; which stand rendered me quite unpopular, with many of the leading ones of the church.” I believe this was in reference to what happened AFTER Joseph was murdered, because Marks later says, “I mentioned the circumstances of these conversations with Joseph to many of the brethren, immediately after his death but the only effect it had was to raise a report that Brother Marks, was about to apostatize…” and his statement was pronounced as false. After Brigham Young took control of the church, he released William as the stake president and tried to have him excommunicated. In another section at 15:10 you assume that Joseph used the word "satisfied" because he thought polygamy was of God, but now he didn't. Look at the capitalized word "SATISFACTION" above, and it does not have the same intent that you assumed Joseph used it. Words can change over time, so it's important to see how they were used in Joseph's time. The 1828 Webster's dictionary gives one definition of satisfaction as: "3. Repose of the mind on the certainty of any thing." Joseph only says he was deceived, but that doesn't mean he was deceived into practicing polygamy, as you assume. In fact, in an interview by Edmund Briggs, an RLDS church apostle, William Marks was asked for clarification: "Did you, when you had that conversation with Bro. Joseph, think he had been in any way mixed up in polygamy, or had favored it?” William replied, “No. I had more confidence in him at that time than I ever had in all my life before, and was satisfied that he was pure from that gross crime.” William goes on to say, "I had been troubled over the condition of the church for some time, and been fearful that Joseph did not bring the pressure against some men in the church that he should have done… But I thought he had been DECEIVED IN SOME OF THE MEN AND ELDERS OF THE CHURCH, and had too much confidence in some of them.” Source: At 3:50 kzbin.info/www/bejne/r36Qc6Cqq89_lcU Everyone has mental models and biases they support and you and I can't help to see the same "evidence" through those believe system and then use it to support our mental model. I agree that Joseph was fallible and he made mistakes; however, he also was open about those mistakes and quick to repent and change his mind if he felt he was wrong, which is evident in his conversation with Marks. Whether he actually practiced polygamy and then repented, or he was deceived by the brethren into believing it would be an advantage to the church can be argued. But what can't be dismissed or argued is when William reports that Joseph called it "a curse to mankind, and we shall have to leave the United States soon, unless it can be put down, and its practice stopped in the church." Joseph recognized it as a cursed doctrine that was being taught and lived by the brethren and if he had lived long enough, he was going to "put it down, and its practice stopped in the church." After Joseph's death, Brigham and leading brethren supported and encouraged it, and Joseph's declaration that this curse would cause them to have to leave the United States turned out to be prophetic when they fled Nauvoo in the winter. Joseph was a man, albeit one with a high calling and sacred duty to perform, and as a man he had flaws and could make mistakes. That is why Nephi warned us to not put our trust in man, or make flesh our arm - which includes you and me - save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost (2 Nephi 28:31) ...which is the only way we can learn and know truth. Neither you, I, nor anyone you quote should be trusted in that what they say is the truth unless it is confirmed by the Spirit.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

Thanks for your opinion. 1. In the 1853 statement, Marks describes polygamy as a "doctrine" and "principle of exaltation". Only Joseph could do this. In the Oct 1865 statement, Marks said Joseph thought polygamy would be an advantage to the church. Do you seriously think either of those would happen if Joseph was against it from the start? 2. Joseph said they should be excommunicated "unless they made ample satisfaction", which Joseph did. According to Marks he was very contrite. Why could this not include himself? 3. If the twelve were doing polygamy behind Joseph's back then why would they have to leave the US and why would Marks tell them about Joseph's conversation? Neither make any sense. 4. The Edmund Briggs quote was 30 years after Marks death. It is interesting that you literally ignore Marks words and instead use a highly biased quote that almost certainly never came from Marks himself. You also are completely ignoring how Marks said Joseph thought polygamy would be a good thing for the church. Why would Joseph say this? It is crazy the steps people will take to defend the indefensible. Frankly, Marks could have said that he saw Joseph personally engaged in polygamy and people would twist it to mean something else.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

This is 100% obvious however you don't want it to be. If you step back a little and understand that Joseph was fallen by this point, then it becomes easier to mentally handle. If you are interested, then I would recommend you watch my video on whether Joseph overstepped his bounds and the Nauvoo Expositor. Both show that Joseph was not the person that people make him out to be. He was a deeply fallible person who made tremendous mistakes. This Thursday I am going to release a video on how Joseph literally changed revelations because they didn't work out how he wanted them to. You have a mental model of Joseph that is not supported by the scriptures or history. You don't need to maintain this anymore. When you let go of this then everything becomes so much more clear.

[@TheyWereInOne]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism Responding to your points: 1. Joseph was obviously not against polygamy from the start, since he admitted that he was deceived into believing it would be an advantage. According to William Mark, Joseph changed his mind and called it "a curse to mankind, and we shall have to leave the United States soon, unless it can be put down, and its practice stopped in the church." In reference to the doctrine of polygamy being a principle of exaltation, Marks says, "he took a stand against it; which stand rendered me quite unpopular, with many of the leading ones of the church." I believe this was in reference to what happened after Joseph was murdered, because Marks says how he was ostracized and accused of lies. After Brigham Young took control, he replaced Marks and tried to have him excommunicated. 2. Where is the reference that you make that Joseph "made ample satisfaction"? And what does it actually mean? Would the people practicing polygamy need to divorce all but one wife... there aren't details about what this meant. Your accusing Joseph of something where there is no evidence prior to his death, and nothing Marks said points to him specifically practicing polygamy. 3. Marks says he "mentioned the circumstances with Joseph to many of his brethern, immediately after his death..." He does not say he spoke to the twelve, but it obviously got to their ears. Joseph saying that they would have to leave the United States unless it was speedily put down became prophetic, and the church came close to ruin and was saved after the 1890 Manifesto stopped the practice. 4. It's interesting that you labeled quote "highly biased quote that almost certainly never came from Marks himself." What proof do you have that quote was highly biased. Is it because he was an apostle in the RLDS church? You referenced a quote that was decades old and from an RLDS meeting minutes. Would that also make it biased? Also, in that same quote, it says that "Hyrum read a revelation on it in the High Council and He Marks felt it was not true but he saw the High Council received it." You even state that you wish there was more information about it. This was a big nothing burger of a quote that didn't prove anything, but you still included it. Next you say I am defending the indefensible, but you're doing the same thing with the numerous assumptions you make in a quasi-authoritative voice. Also, Marks could have said Joseph was practicing polygamy in the numerous quotes you reference, but he was consistent in NOT saying that, so don't twist it into something that it is not. Everyone has mental models and biases they support and you and I see "evidence" through those believe systems that we've created. I agree that Joseph was fallible and he made mistakes; however, he also was open about those mistakes, which is evident in his conversation with Marks. That is why Nephi warned us to not put our trust in man, or make flesh our arm, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost (2 Nephi 28:31) ...which is the only way we can learn and know truth. Neither you, I nor anyone you quote should be trusted to speak the truth unless it is confirmed by the Spirit.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

@@TheyWereInOne 1. You are claiming that Joseph "was deceived into believing [polygamy] would be an advantage", yet he never practiced it? This is super rich and makes no sense. Joseph made it a "doctrine" and "principle of exaltation", yet never practiced it himself? I think anti-polygamy warps people's minds. 2. Ample satisfaction is up to the individual. I am not going to judge people's personal situations and neither should you. If what Marks said about Joseph is true then he really was sorry about what he did. The longer quote says that Joseph went to Carthage because he felt bad about his decision which sounds pretty ample to me. 3. You are ignoring why Joseph said they would have to leave the united states. So a rogue group of people in the church can force the church to leave a country? This makes no sense. Can I make the LDS church leave America? You also are ignoring what the word "brethren" meant to Marks. Do you really think "brethren" means a random member"? In the church today do we say "brethren" to refer to a nobody in our ward or the 12? Think about it and be honest. 4. The quote didn't exist until 30 years after Marks death. It also directly contradicts Marks personal statements and supported the RLDS narrative. The RLDS meeting minutes was written while Marks was alive this is completely different. The meeting minutes are not a nothing burger, but you just fail to see them for what they are. Mark said that Hyrum read a revelation from Joseph about polygamy and Marks didn't agree with this. We also know that Austin Cowles, Marks councilor, didn't agree either. How is this a nothing burger? According to Marks Joseph is the author of the revelation. Super crazy how people ignore what they don't like. Marks could have been clearer I 100% agree. I think Marks respected Joseph and people had a certain sense of dignity back then. This is the same with Oliver Cowdrey's remark about the "dirty, nasty, filthy, scrape". This is ambiguous and I wish it wasn't. You can believe Marks was not clear on this however it is frankly silly to me that anyone sees it otherwise. According to Marks 1. Joseph saw polygamy as an advantage 2. Joseph received a revelation on polygamy 3. Joseph made it a doctrine and principle of exaltation 4. Joseph admitted he was wrong about polygamy 5. Joseph wanted to correct his mistake about polygamy All this and Joseph didn't practice polygamy? I don't think so. Believe Briggs if you want. However, it is so crazy that you will believe old biased quotes in your favor. However you won't believe "old biased quotes" which are not in your favor. This is the height of being biased. Based on the Nauvoo Expositor Joseph was well out of the way. He was not the choir boy you claim he was.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

@@TheyWereInOne The more I interact with "awake" people in Mormonism that still worship Joseph, the more I think of this quote: “A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree, and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point. We have all experienced the futility of trying to change a strong conviction, especially if the convinced person has some investment in his belief. We are familiar with the variety of ingenious defenses with which people protect their convictions, managing to keep them unscathed through the most devastating attacks. But man’s resourcefulness goes beyond simply protecting a belief. Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.” When Prophecy Fails - Leon Festinger Joseph was wrong about so many things. It is hard to see at first, yet so obvious when you finally do.

[@Kristy_not_Kristine]

I don't believe William Marks thought Joseph practiced polygamy. Your interpretation is just one of at least 2 ways it could be interpretated.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

This is true. I don't claim this is a smoking gun or anything. However I think if you looked at it without a bias then it is pretty clear. Marks said it was a "doctrine", a "principle of exaltation", Joseph thought it would be an "advantage", that Joseph had been "deceived", and Hyrum read a "revelation" about polygamy from Joseph. I would bet money that Marks thought Joseph was involved. However people don't want to see the truth.

[@randyjordan5521]

I sugges that you scroll through this comments section and read the historical documentation I've posted.

[@icecreamladydriver1606]

What are the chances that when Marks said that Joseph said that he had been deceived, he was talking about the people practicing polygamy had deceived him into believing that they were not practicing it rather than that Joseph had preached it and practiced it?

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

Pretty close to 0. I know people really want to see it this way. However, I would bet money that if these statements were given to impartial people then 99 out of 100 would agree that they say Joseph was involved. It is really very clear when Marks says that Joseph thought polygamy would be an advantage, but turned out to be a curse instead. Why would Marks lie about it or why would Joseph say that. Who would say polygamy would be an advantage if they thought it was wrong from the start?

[@randyjordan5521]

Here is William Marks' account of his conversation with Smith: ‘This doctrine of polygamy or Spiritual wife system, that has been taught and practiced among us, will prove our destruction and overthrow. I have been deceived,’ said he, ‘in reference to its practice; it is wrong; it is a curse to mankind, and we shall have to leave the United States soon, unless it can be put down, and its practice stopped in the church." Note that Smith called polygamy a "doctrine." If polygamy was an unauthorized, rogue practice engaged in by sinful apostles, Smith wouldn't have called it a "doctrine." Both he and Marks knew very well that it was a doctrine that Smith had taught and practiced. William Marks had been present in the Nauvoo High Council meeting of August 12, 1843, during which Hyrum Smith presented the revelation on celestial marriage for the council's vote. Marks had also been a member of the Hancock County grand jury which heard the charges of adultery and fornication filed against Smith on May 23, 1844. So Marks knew very well that Smith was the originator of polygamy. Note also that Smith told Marks that if polygamy was not put down, that the Mormons would have to leave the country. If polygamy had been a rogue, unauthorized practice engaged in by sinful apostles, there would have been no need for the Mormons to have to pull up stakes and move yet again; all Smith had to do was denounce the practice and kick out all of its practitioners. But too many incidents had already happened by that time---William Law, Jane Law, and Austin Cowles had already filed their legal affidavits stating that Joseph or Hyrum had personally presented the "revelation" to them. So Joseph's instruction to Marks to set about excommunicating all polygamists was a desperation move, intended to allow Smith to retain his position as church president and city mayor. But his efforts went to naught when he unwisely ordered the destruction of the "Nauvoo Expositor" press, which publicized details of his polygamy practice. That crime got Joseph and Hyrum arrested, and they were killed 17 days later.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

@@randyjordan5521 I didn't pick up on the word 'doctrine', however that is a good observation.

[@randyjordan5521]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism I have studied these issues for more than 25 years. It is obvious from the fact that William Marks was in that High Council meeting of August 12, 1843, wherein Hyrum Smith presented the revelation, that Marks was fully aware that the doctrine and practice came from Joseph Smith. In fact, the very reason Smith chose Marks to begin excommunicating polygamists was BECAUSE Marks had rejected the doctrine. Other polygamy dissidents such as William Law, Austin Cowles, the Higbees, Fosters, etc. had already been excommunicated because of their opposition. Marks was the highest-ranking non-polygamous church leader left standing who had the "moral authority" to set about reversing the practice. That is the meaning of Marks' statement: “Brother Marks, you have not received this doctrine, and how glad I am. I want you to go into the high council, and I will have charges preferred against all who practice this doctrine, and I want you to try them by the laws of the church, and cut them off, if they will not repent, and cease the practice of this doctrine." This chain of events is corroborated by the 1869 affidavit of High Councilor David Fullmer, who had also been in that 1843 meeting: "Be it remembered that on this fifteenth day of June, A.D. 1869, personally appeared before me, James Jack, a notary public in and for said county, David Fullmer, who was by me sworn in due form of law, and upon his oath saith, that on or about the 12th day of August, A.D. 1843, while in meeting with the High Council [he being a member thereof] in Hyrum Smith's brick office, in the City of Nauvoo, County of Hancock, State of Illinois, Dunbar Wilson made inquiry in relation to the subject of plurality of wives, as there were rumors about respecting it, and he was satisfied there was something in those rumors, and he wanted to know what it was. Upon which Hyrum Smith stepped across the road to his residence, and soon returned bringing with him a copy of the revelation on celestial marriage given to Joseph Smith July 12, 1843, and read the same to the High Council, and bore testimony to its truth. The said David Fullmer further saith that, to the best of his memory and belief, the following named persons were present: William Marks, Austin A. Cowles, Samuel Bent, George W. Harris, Dunbar Wilson, William Huntington, Levi Jackman, Aaron Johnson, Thomas Grover, David Fullmer, Phineas Richards, James Allred and Leonard Soby. And the said David Fullmer further saith that William Marks, Austin A. Cowles and Leonard Soby were the only persons present who did not receive the testimony of Hyrum Smith, and that all the others did receive it from the teachings and testimony of the said Hyrum Smith; and further, that the copy of said revelation on celestial marriage published in the Deseret News extra of September 14, A.D., 1852, is a true copy of the same." Thomas Grover was another High Councilor who was in that 1843 meeting. Here is his affidavit: "Be it remembered that on this Sixth day of July A.D. 1869 personally appeared before me James Jack, a Notary Public in and for said county Thos. Grover who was by me sworn in due form of law and upon his oath saith that the affidavit of David Fullmer, before me James Jack, on the fifteenth day of June A.D. 1869 is true and correct. And the said Thomas Grover further saith that Hyrum Smith reasoned upon said Revelation for about an hour, clearly explaining the same, and then enjoined it upon said Council, to receive and acknowledge the same, or they would be damned, and further, that from the day that William Marks, A. A. Cowles and L. Soby refused to receive said Revelation as from God they continued to dwindle until they appostatized. Thomas Grover" Because there were multiple men who testified that William Marks was in that 1843 meeting---and they testified that Marks opposed Hyrum's proposal to sustain the revelation as church doctrine---then the correct meaning and interpretation of Marks' 1853 report of his 1844 conversation with Joseph Smith is obvious. Marks was an honest man who believed in the "restoration," but he believed that Joseph's "spiritual wifery" practice was wrong, just as did Austin Cowles, Leonard Soby, and William Law. So because Marks remained loyal to Joseph and retained his position as Nauvoo stake president, Joseph assigned him the task of setting about excommunicating all polygamists. But of course, Joseph's arrest and subsequent death prevented Marks from acting. Also, there is documentation (which I'm not going to bother to look up at this moment) that after Joseph's death, Marks attempted to inform Brigham Young and the other apostles about Joseph's intention to abolish polygamy, but Young & Co. refused to believe Marks, and called him an apostate. Because those men had been inducted into plural marriage---and some of them into the "anointed quorum" and the "Council of Fifty" personally by Joseph---they simply refused to believe Marks. Keep in mind that at the time of Joseph's death, most of the apostles, including Young, were away from Nauvoo. So Joseph had no way to inform them of his desperate attempt to begin abolishing polygamy, and the polygamists simply refused to believe Marks. I hope this helps you understand the situation.

[@icecreamladydriver1606]

@@randyjordan5521 Note also that Smith told Marks that if polygamy was not put down, that the Mormons would have to leave the country." This sounds so iffy to me. If I were engaged in something I wouldn't say "if polygamy was not put down". That to me sounds more like he needs to go after something he knows is becoming a problem. Brigham Young give two accounts of his introduction into polygamy. In one he says that Joseph took him aside and taught him about it and that he was sickened by it... bla bla bla....... In the other he claims that it was reveled to him while on his mission before Joseph had said anything to him. This for me casts more doubts that Joseph was in on it. Then as to the expositor, there are a couple of different stories on that and one being that it wasn't just Joseph but in the council he was encouraged strongly by some of the guys involved in printing bogus money, that Joseph didn't know about, and they wanted the evidence destroyed. This way they could make it look like it was Joseph. When you think about the fact that he announced that he was going to start exing those practicing it and shortly after he is set up to go to Carthage then he is murdered tells me there is enough of a question there to cast doub. There is a lot more to it even than this that makes me hesitate. But what it all comes down to is that if he did or he did not then he did or he did not.

[@kentskoien7583]

The rebellion of apostates is always a sad thing, and all are invited to make use of the merciful gift of God: Repentance. The Church of Jesus Christ has been restored to the earth, and is led and guided by Him through His living prophet until He returns. There is no room for rebellion. Questions : Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, how will they be judged by the Saviour for their several wives ? Where did those old prophets get their guidence from ? The twelve patriachs, the sons of Israel (Jacob) ; the house of Israel, the Israelites, are they the results of whoredoms ? Who commanded that ?

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

Who is an apostate here? Are you saying that a video describing quotes from William Marks, a Stake President in the church, is a sign of apostasy? Are you an apostate? Am I an apostate? Why? Can you be more specific?

[@Kristy_not_Kristine]

Careful who you can an apostate, as it very well could be you. Mote and beams, ya know

[@holyroller4391]

Again good job. I feel like you base allot of what you believe off of this. Have you at all thought that if the spirit of adultery had taken over the church that a spirit of lying and theft was there as well. I would say most certainly, for that's what adultery is, if theft and lies. If this were the case even if Joseph said this to Marx, I don't think it proves anything. Again have you forgotten the statutes given to Moses about plural marriage??? Really you should test the spirits, and testing polygamy is just so simple when you match it up with God's commandments. You have to take all information to be had, before you hastily form a opinion. Other than that good job. 👍

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

Thanks. I think there were evil spirits that had taken over for sure. When the people decided they didn't want to follow God, then God left them to other lessor gods. From the Bible then it certainly seems that God is okay with a certain amount of polygamy. I don't think though that it should be forced as a part of exaltation. If anything though, then it has to be practiced by celestial level people who would willingly sacrifice everything for another person's wellbeing. We are most certainly not at that level yet.

[@holyroller4391]

@@uncorrelatedmormonism 👍 so what your saying is 132 could have been a true revelation? Some assume the revelation was given as early as 1830, and that it came in pieces over the years instead of all at once.

[@Lovecatholicfaith]

Did Jesus give to Moses statutes about polygamy where . I can’t find it in the Bible.

[@holyroller4391]

@@Lovecatholicfaith Exodus 21:10 "If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish." It references it throughout, besides actual statutes it refers to the situation. Regardless, why did God bless and favor a polygamist over all people? All the tribes of Israel came from four different women married to the same man.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

@@Lovecatholicfaith Levirate marriage is the clearest one in the bible. It is Deuteronomy 25:5-10, where a brother is commanded to marry his dead brother's wife if she had no children.

[@jaredvaughan1665]

Well researched. I hope Michelle Stone watches this to snap out of her dilusions.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

You're going to get hate comments for that. 😊 If people look at the full quotes from Marks, then it is very clear what he meant. People however, have to use shortened quotes so there is ambiguity.

[@spencerall]

Michelle started her journey in the scriptures to determine if polygamy is of God. She found that it is not. She then found so much evidence of Brigham and the twelve being the greatest promoters of it that she may have some blind spots in her bias to preserve Joseph from the stain of ever practicing it.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

@spencerall I think polygamy is not of God. However the evidence that she "sees" is colored by her bias. For instance, she talked about William Marks and intentionally didn't look at the full quote or even all the quotes from William. Michelle does some good work on exposing that the evidence is not as clear. However, her work is definitely biased towards her predetermined conclusion. Which is more likely William Marks lied, when he had no reason to, or Joseph lied in order to bide his time? Joseph may also not even have lied because "celestial marriage" and "polygamy" are technically not the same thing. Therefore denying one is not denying the other. Lawyers do this all the time today and they have no problem with language like that.

[@holyroller4391]

Delusions are all around, not just with her. It's sad

[@randyjordan5521]

Over a period of almost two years, I posted hundreds of comments to Michelle's videos, including dozens of historical evidences which refute her misguided, wrong opinions. Michelle worships Joseph Smith, and she does not want to believe that he was a liar, an adulterer, and a hypocrite. So she is in a state of emotional and intellectual denial of the facts. Michelle is afflicted with similar flawed thought processes of flat-earthers, moon landing deniers, or proponents of other conspiracy theories.

[@sirrichard87]

Why did Joseph Smith, Jr. and so many of the early church executives begin polygyny? Joseph Smith wholeheartedly promoted The Book of Mormon as God's word. Yet Jacob 2:27 states "For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife" while verse 30 declares "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." Thus, unless God Himself directly commands polygyny, the default is one man wedded to one woman. It's quite clear. There must be more to the story. Something is missing.

[@icecreamladydriver1606]

Yes, the thing that is missing is the misinterpretation of verse 30. Read verse thirty then go back to verse 25. You will see that the Nephites he was talking to were the "seed" spoken of in verse 30 and God commanded Lehi and the others to get out of the land of Jerusalem "otherwise they would harken unto these things" meaning polygamy, wives and concubines because that was one of the biggest reasons God was allowing Jerusalem to be overtaken. They had become a wicked and idol worshipping people and taking many wives and concubines. "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". "25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph". Brigham Young convinced the people that verse thirty was an exception to the rule. But it wasn't. If you continue reading verse 31-35 Jacob tell us why polygamy is such a vile abomination. 31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands. 32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts. 33 For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts. 34 And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done. 35 Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend up to God against you. And because of the strictness of the word of God, which cometh down against you, many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds. I cannot believe that a loving Heavenly Father could speak so lovingly of his daughters and then with a cold, hard heart say "But tough luck sweetheart. I want more seed and you are going to provide it. That isn't the God that I have read about in the scriptures.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

I agree with you. This is a question that we need to ask Joseph to get a true answer. According to William Marks there was a revelation and Joseph thought it was from God. This is consistent with other revelations Joseph received, that he thought were from God, but turned out not to be. For instance selling the copyright to the Book of Mormon and the Kirtland Safety Society. Both were clear revelations that turned out to be of man or the Devil. Another point is I am honestly not sure how often Joseph even read the Book of Mormon. Very likely we read it more often than he did. He almost never talked about it and almost never referenced it. It was basically just a supporting document and not a pillar like we use it today. Therefore a scripture like Jacob 2 could easily have been overlooked if someone wanted to do so.

[@uncorrelatedmormonism]

@@icecreamladydriver1606 Yes, it is very hard for me to imagine that polygamy could be successful in anything but the most perfect of situations. Anytime someone is allowed to gratify their based desires as much as they want then there is going to be trouble.

[@randyjordan5521]

"Why did Joseph Smith, Jr. and so many of the early church executives begin polygyny?" Simple reason: It's because Joseph Smith wanted to have sex with other women. As the founder and leader of a Christian-based sect, he couldn't just go around boinking women willy-nilly. Because he claimed to be a "prophet" and "seer," he had to come up with a "revelation" which explained and justified the practice. That's why he included verbiage in his "revelation" about "the blessings of Abraham" and "raising up seed." That is how he was able to induce more than 100 people to accept his doctrine and practice. Once a disciple accepts a man as the one true prophet of God, they are more inclined to obey whatever "revelations" that man issues for them.

[@Kristy_not_Kristine]

You're reading that one verse out of context. Read the entire sermon and pay a little more attention to what "these things" refers to.