SOT LitnerStandard of Truth listener companion
The French-Canadian mailbag
S2E40 · Prosperity Theology Part 2 1:2 and Other Bad Arguments
0:00 / 1:08:08
14 chapters
← All episodes
Standard of Truth · Season 2 · Episode 40 · 1:08:08

Prosperity Theology Part 2 1:2 and Other Bad Arguments

A viral meme sets Joseph Smith's journal next to "Brigham's edited version" to claim Joseph opposed polygamy, but the journal itself shows him forbidding unauthorized plural marriage while he was practicing it.

Press play above. The page follows along.
The question ·
Your discussion kind of made it sound like blessing slash prosperity, and their opposites are not attributable to God, but are more often just cosmic part of the plan we agreed upon. So far, 70 years, I have been living under the assumption that God will bless us for our righteousness.
Dan (listener)

Richard opens a French-Canadian mailbag with Dave, who thanks them for the Under the Banner of Heaven episodes, reports a Sunday School teacher's claim that Lincoln dog-eared the Alma war chapters, and says he'd rather hear about the Kirtland Safety Society or Zion's Camp than polygamy. Dan, age 70, asks how to square "prosper in the land" and D&C 130's law "irrevocably decreed" with the idea that stuff just happens, so Gerrit explains that we can't call our shot on blessings and shares Elder Uchtdorf's 2010 story of keeping the Word of Wisdom and still being passed by runners who smoked and drank. Then Sister So-and-So writes that her father left the Church for end-times dreamers and an apostate group. Gerrit answers by taking apart a meme claiming Brigham Young edited Joseph's 1843 journal to hide that Joseph opposed polygamy, showing what the journal really says, how the History of the Church was compiled, and why the meme leaves out every other source.

Who comes upJoseph SmithBrigham YoungWillard RichardsWilliam ClaytonDieter F. UchtdorfLazarusAmanda Barnes Smith
Now playing · 0:39

The French-Canadian mailbag

Richard names the mailbag after a Quebec postmaster and explains his family's roots.

Chapters

Tap a chapter to jump there

Transcript

150 moments · tap a time to play from there
Intro Welcome to the Standard of Truth Podcast, hosted by historian Dr. Gerrit Dirkmaat, where we explore the early days of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and gain rare historical insights into how a young farm boy was able to establish a new church and grow it by way of visions, manifestations and miracles.
Gerrit Hi, welcome to another episode of the Standard of Truth podcast. I'm your host, Dr. Gerrit Dirkmaat, and I'm joined by my friend, Professor Richard LeDuc.
Richard Hello, Gerrit. In this week's podcast, we're gonna kick things off with the Telus Fort-Fornier mailbag.
Gerrit The Telus Fort-Fornier.
Richard Fort-Nier mailbag.
Gerrit I feel that there might be some of your ancestry coming to bear.
Richard Yes, oh my gosh, he's so French-Canadian, and he's from Quebec. Canadian postmaster in 1875, only served a few months before being put in as a member of the Supreme Court in Canada.
Gerrit Wow, you went big. I like how these Quebecois flex their muscles. It wasn't enough to just find a postmaster somewhere.
Richard No, also a member of the Supreme Court of Canada.
Gerrit Richard's family goes very far back to Quebec.
Richard We do, I believe I mentioned this on the podcast before, but we were kicked out of France in 1690 from Lyon. And so we've been in North America for some time.
Gerrit At what point did you become a United States of American instead of Canadian North Americans?
Richard I think we started migrating over in the early 1900s, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and then warmed our way.
Gerrit So you just crossed the border then?
Richard Absolutely, we did.
Gerrit Yeah. You walked across Sault Ste. Marie. You saw the French name, Sault Ste. Marie, that's got to be open to us. And we just came across. Well, that makes sense.
Richard So this first email comes to us from a gentleman named Dave. Esteemed Dr. Dirkmaat and Corps Sergeant Major LeDuc, your most recent episode mentioned that you're looking for new titles for Richard. I originally thought about Sultan, Pharaoh, Maharaja, and even Czar, but then landed nicely on Corps Sergeant Major because it's the highest rank of non-commissioned officer, can reach in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
Gerrit So now I see why we're using a Canadian.
Richard That's right. That's the connection. That's right. I thought I played nicely with Richard's deep and rich Canadian heritage. First off, thanks for the sports tip on the red socks. That was an episode where we were looking at a format change, and I gave sports gambling, and my wife did not think that was funny.
Gerrit She told us we could never do that again.
Richard At all. Also because we lost every one of those picks. I have been a Boston fan since I was little, and it's nice to know someone besides me is naive enough to believe that they will actually win. They actually didn't get the over-under for wins for the season.
Gerrit It was unfortunate.
Richard Dave, sorry about that. Second off, I would like to thank you guys for once again doing this podcast. I have listened to all the episodes multiple times, so you're the one.
Gerrit Driving our numbers.
Richard And I'm currently cycling through them again. I literally never get tired of them. Of particular note, there are episodes you did on the TV show Under the Banner of Heaven. Just yesterday, I had a work colleague and friend who's not a member of our faith ask me about this TV show. Apparently, he was watching it and had some legitimate questions. I will admit that even though I lived in Utah my entire life and was alive in 1984 when the Lafferty brothers were running amok, I did not know much about this.
Gerrit Kind of underselling it there, but yeah.
Richard I did not know much about the tragic events until I listened to your episodes on the subject. Thanks for your insights. And the response from Richard Turley's references, referenced in your show notes, was able to answer his questions and we had a good conversation about it. Also several months ago, my wife and I were visiting my daughter and son-in-law's ward, and the gospel doctrine teacher said that he was convinced that Abraham Lincoln had read the Book of Mormon. He also said that Lincoln spent considerable amount of time in the war chapters in Alma, specifically the chapters with the 2000 tripling warriors. He said he knew this because when Lincoln returned the book to the Library of Congress, the pages in that part of the book were dog-eared, and Lincoln was known to dog-ear book pages when he read.
Gerrit I may have to just interrupt there at that point.
Richard I don't know if you've listened to that one.
Gerrit No, I mean, not David, but anyone else. I don't know if anyone else has listened to the other podcast episodes besides Rachel's mom. Rachel's mom, I found out, signed up for our tour. That's true. Those people going are going to spend some quality time with Rachel. You're going to be able to find the real reveal. What's Rachel's mom's real name? We've actually had lots of people emailing, guessing who the Rachel is, whose mom it is. And the reveal is coming.
Richard And by the way, just as an aside, it is actually something for this, the silly podcast that's been now going on a little over a year, the listeners are just the absolute, but first of all, the emails are always very funny that people send in.
Gerrit Because they're giving you fake titles.
Richard But the response to the tour was actually awesome. It was ridiculous.
Gerrit I'm excited.
Richard Yeah, we had, it was nearly completely full within a week. We do have about four spots that we're looking to open up additionally. But I mean, it was...
Gerrit We'll do it again. Unless it's a total failure and everyone says it's the worst thing that they ever experienced.
Richard So we won't be doing it again.
Gerrit Okay, so just like he's betting the Red Sox, he's betting the outcome of our tour. He's got a problem and I'm going to need Brady, his bishop, to step in.
Richard All right, so then he says... So by the way, so your thoughts really quick on the Lincoln hypothesis.
Gerrit You know, we've talked a lot on this podcast about how we know things. How we know things is... It's an important thing when someone says, I know Joseph Smith X, I know Abraham Lincoln Y. How do we know those things? And in fact, we're going to talk a little bit about that on this podcast today. So what do people think they know? Well, that Lincoln was scouring the pages of the Book of Mormon and he dog-eared the pages, even when you say Lincoln was known to dog-ear pages that he liked. Well, first of all, that would suggest a chain of custody of the Book of Mormon in the Library of Congress that no one else had ever checked it out. Unless someone had checked it out, took pictures of every page, saw which ones were dog-eared, and also had a sticky note that wasn't invented yet from Abraham Lincoln saying, by the way, I'm going to use Helaman's plan to stop Leonidas' Polk's advance in the upper Mississippi Valley.
Gerrit And I expect someone to know the Leonidas' Polk reference. By the way, he was a preacher and a terrible general. He was a preacher who argued that the Bible argued that slavery was from God.
Richard That's good.
Gerrit What way to bring it down. Anyway, but the point being, here someone is making a claim, because someone else has made that claim, that definitively you know something. When in fact, what do we know? We know that the White House had the Book of Mormon in its possession. We actually don't know whether or not Abraham Lincoln read it. We know that it's eventually returned. And we know that shortly after its return, Lincoln signs the first anti-Mormon bill in American history. So as we said on that podcast, I don't know how touched he was by the strategy of Helaman if he was reading it. But much more likely, he was trying to understand this religion that radical Republicans in the Congress were trying to restrict. At any rate, it's great to always step back and say, how do I know what it is I say that I know? Especially when we're talking about historical facts. We're talking about the Holy Spirit. We're talking about miracles. Look, I know that Jesus Christ lives through the Holy Spirit.
Gerrit I don't know that through historical facts. I don't have the ability to know that just through facts alone. But once we start to make claims about the past and we say them definitively, well then, we need to make sure we're following rules that historians would follow to make a claim about the past.
Richard Well, I think one of the other most important takeaways is that the job of a gospel doctrine teacher is difficult, but don't make stuff up.
Gerrit Right, so it goes back to my dissertation advisor, very first methods class. If any of you decide, you know what, I kind of like this podcast. I too would like to be underemployed and have a podcast that generates no revenue. What if I were to go get a history PhD? At least Richard's gonna get PhD in business, which is meaningless in the business world. They're like, I don't care whether or not you have a PhD.
Richard That's true, but I found it incredibly valuable in the church history podcast world.
Gerrit Oh man, it's opened so many doors. At first, I didn't even want him on the podcast. He said, but wait, I'm getting a PhD and I'm so ivory tower. I was like, okay, fine. I'll let you in the door. But if you ever did, the first thing you'd learn going through a history PhD, your methods class, one of the first things they teach you is what my methods teacher said. The key rule of history is one, you can't make anything up. Now that sounds like that's a pretty easy rule. But what you'll find, and actually one of the topics we're going to cover today, is oftentimes we don't make up the sources, but we certainly invent a narrative and a conclusion about that source that is not really warranted or not really supported. And so you can't make anything up. The other is you can't leave anything out. So if you know that there are three separate sources talking about the marriage of someone in a questionable marriage, well then, you don't get to just take the one that suits your purposes.
Gerrit You have to describe all of them.
Richard And this is one of the things that you talk about quite a bit, where one of the problems with people that are amateur historians is that they know of a source and might even be a decent source. But in the particular case you're talking about, which we're going to discuss in a future podcast, we're really going to discuss it in a future podcast.
Gerrit Not like how we normally say. Maybe we better finish Dave's email to tell you why.
Richard Oh yeah, that's a good point. He says thank you, by the way, for telling him about that so that he was aware of providing some clarity. And then he says, as for suggestions for future podcasts, I can honestly say I don't really care if you ever get to polygamy.
Gerrit And again, I'm assuming he means talking about it, not practicing it.
Richard Either or. It's just not something I'm all that interested in. Maybe I'm the only listener, that actually is true, Dave, who feels this way, but I would much rather hear you guys talk about the Kirtland Safety Society or Zions Camp.
Gerrit Which topics we do need to cover at some point.
Richard Absolutely. So he's saying, you know what, don't get to polygamy.
Gerrit Yeah, season 38, season 39. I don't care.
Richard I don't care.
Gerrit You know what? And so because of that, because what we were waiting for was for someone to say, I don't really care if you cover it, we're going to cover it. Dave, he did the whole switcheroo, you know, the kind of psychological thing, you know. And so now I feel like, you know what? Now we're going to have to. So we're going to talk about it a little bit today in response to a listener's question. And then in a couple of forthcoming podcasts, we're going to take the plunge. We're going to go 20,000 leagues under the sea. So, and then probably be destroyed by a giant squid.
Richard So anyway, thank you, Dave, very much. Second podcast.
Gerrit Email?
Richard That's what I meant. What am I?
Gerrit Well, we're just going to start another podcast.
Richard Second podcast that I'm also listening to.
Gerrit He's planning to leave this. You can't see this, but while we're doing this, he has two separate iPads open to the left of him with different football games on that he's watching instead of talking. The reason why he got hung up there is I think he saw Clemson score.
Richard I saw Clemson not score. That's part of the problem. So, dear Dr. Dirkmaat and Professor LeDuc, I can't tell you how much I look forward to your podcast each week. Your two-parter, or your true, your true parter?
Gerrit No, no, you're keeping that. I'm not cutting that out.
Richard Alright, let me try that again. Your two-part podcast regarding Marlene's Great Question might even require a third part. I'm struggling with the dichotomy of cause and effect. I was left pondering at the end of episode 38, not sure if there is an answer. Stuff just happens. But what keeps ringing in my ears is the scriptural teaching that is oft repeated, If you keep my commandments, you shall prosper in the land, a hundred times in the Book of Mormon. And Doctrine and Covenants, section 130, verses 20-21, There is a law irrevocably decreed in heaven upon which all blessings are predicated, and when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated. Your discussion kind of made it sound like blessing slash prosperity, and their opposites are not attributable to God, but are more often just cosmic part of the plan we agreed upon. So far, 70 years, I have been living under the assumption that God will bless us for our righteousness.
Richard Of course, we don't know exactly what blessings correlate to what obedience, probably different for each person. But according to the scriptures, there seems like there is some connection. I hope you can sense my confusion and help clear it up. Or maybe the question is just too complex to answer. I can't accept that. Thanks again, Dan.
Gerrit Where's Dan writing to us from?
Richard Tell us. I think he did, but I'm trying to protect it.
Gerrit Yeah. Dave was writing to us from Springville. And tonight, my son's ninth grade football team is playing the Springville juggernaut. Springville was torn through that ninth grade league like it was just Swiss cheese and it was a hot knife. I don't think anyone's even scored on them. So I'm hoping that my son's team puts up a good effort and loses by 40. But Dan, that's a really good question. Now, Dan, so everyone knows there is two parts to that Prosperity podcast. And Dan emailed us after the first one. And so part of, I think, Dan's question, we do cover. In fact, we cover those specific scriptures in the second one. So maybe he would have waited and not sent exactly that had he read it, or probably he'd have been more frustrated at our terrible explanation. I try to make clear in the second part of that podcast that we absolutely believe that God blesses us for righteous living.
Gerrit The great problem of mortality, however, is we don't know what God intends to bless us with. I told you on an earlier podcast, very early, back before we had bad mics, and when you didn't want to listen anymore, and then somehow came back to it later because someone said, no, no, it's better. And then you're listening now and saying not that even, you know, that when I wouldn't even the graduate school, I went to, I went to in kind of a haze of disappointments because what I thought I had earned, you know, my by living a righteous life, by doing all the things I was supposed to do, by getting the highest grades you can possibly get right, was that I'd get to go to the graduate school, my choice. And when the one I wanted, you know, turned me down, I was stunned. And and I think that gives us a little bit of an insight. We don't know what it is that God deems to bless us with.
Gerrit And and yes, in the Book of Mormon, I think because we think of the collective pride cycle of the Nephites, that we often attempt to apply it to individual life circumstances. Right. So we think, well, you know, as long as I'm being righteous, God's going to bless me with wealth. And then because I have wealth, I'm going to start to become prideful. So I've just really got to what I need to get is right on the top of that curve. Right. I need to get to where I'm riding the wave, where I have the wealth, but I don't have the pride. And it's tough. You know, you got to you got to keep the commandments. Right. But almost always when that's being referenced, it's it's a reference to the people collectively rather than individually. I think of in Alma, where they're talking about the exceedingly great length of the war, that there were many people who stopped believing in God. And then there were many people who, because of the great length of the war, who believed even more. These people went through similar experiences.
Gerrit The reality is many people view blessings as things that you can call your shot on. I'm going to go to the temple four times, and so because of that, God's going to make sure that my son does better in high school than he's doing. Well, while we certainly can go to the temple more, while we certainly can pray more, and that might be the blessing we are asking for, I would guess that every single person listening has had the experience of fervently praying for a very specific outcome and blessing and not getting it.
Richard One of the examples that we talked about as we were doing show prep and reading this email before.
Gerrit By that, he means two minutes before we turned on.
Richard That's right. When I turned off the Clemson game.
Gerrit By the way, I shamed him. He just turned the games off.
Richard I just turned them off. I was literally watching both of them, two games at the same time.
Gerrit Which is why he said Potter, like old man Potter, rather than parter. I'm not sure parter is a word either.
Richard I don't think any of the things I've said were words. One of the things we talked about as an example of this was Third Nephi. After the Savior comes to the people, and you have the majority of Fourth Nephi talks about...
Gerrit Things are great. They never could have been a happier people.
Richard Yeah, right, that they were no poor among them and that everything was wonderful. But even in that circumstance, where it's certainly the case where the people are prospering in the land, it's almost impossible to think in that hundred years that there weren't individual tragedies.
Gerrit Right, because it wasn't the millennium. So it's not like people were immortal at that point. It's not like children didn't die and they were being twinkled. The reality was there still were personal tragedies. And I think that that's the difference. I think that the Nephites collectively needed to be righteous in order for God to bless them collectively. But it's not much of a blessing if you're Teancum's wife and he gets killed trying to kill the leader of the Lamanites.
Richard And it wasn't even just individual suffering, specifically as it relating to prospering. You can't imagine in that hundred years that there wasn't a farmer who didn't have a crop failure, or that somebody didn't have a bad year as a merchant. Like everything wasn't all great all the time, despite righteousness. And certainly it's the case that the Lord does bless us. But the email even brings up this law irrevocably decreed in heaven. I think sometimes that we assign a prosperity or a blessing to a thing that actually isn't the law irrevocably decreed.
Gerrit And isn't the will of the Lord. Joseph says that what will eventually be in the Doctrine and Covenants comes from William Clayton's journal. And it's a part of a wide ranging conversation that they're having about different topics. But if there's anybody who knows that simply living righteously doesn't bring you wealth and prosperity, it's Joseph Smith. He was living very righteously when the Kirtland Safety Society collapsed. He was living very righteously when he lost everything that he had and was thrown in jail in Missouri. The reality is, I guess if we're looking to say, as long as I do X, then I'm guaranteed I'm going to get that job. I think what we have instead is the guarantee from the Lord that he knows who we are and that he's going to provide for us, right?
Gerrit The same way he provides for the sparrows and the lilies of the field. But the lilies of the field aren't driving BMWs, right? The sparrows are not living in the biggest nest that ever existed. God certainly blesses people at times with material wealth, and they in turn bless others with that wealth. But when you look at some of the most righteous people that we know, we don't see that at all. All of you right now know somebody who is a very good man or woman, who very much has dedicated their life to God. And yet they haven't become wealthy or prosperous as far as the world is concerned. Now, maybe even where they're at is in part because God has blessed them. But I think usually when people are having this question, they're thinking about it more in terms of, I'm going to get ahead in the business world because I went to the temple last week.
Gerrit And I know why we want to think that way, but there's a lot of reasons why it's best not to think that way. I know I've told this parable before, I mean, like it's my parable. It's from the New Testament, okay? But I've focused on it before because I think it's really important. There's two parables in that, in the New Testament where Jesus speaks directly to this idea. One, where he talks about the rich man who has so many goods, he doesn't even have a place to put them all. What am I going to do? I have so much stuff, I don't have room in my barns anymore. You know what I'm going to do? I'm going to tear down my barns and build even bigger ones. And what is, you know, I'm sure the Lord says to him, right, that thou fool, this night shall thy life be required of thee. And it doesn't really matter how much stuff you have in the barns if you die that night, right? I'll build bigger barns. Well, you don't, you're not alive anymore. So I guess you won't be building any bigger barns.
Gerrit That trying to say, you know, the dangers of wealth. But then secondly, the poignant story of the rich man and Lazarus, where you have Lazarus, this righteous, very, very, very poor man, and you have this rich man who apparently is not terribly righteous. He's certainly not doing anything to help Lazarus. And Lazarus isn't just poor with no substance. He's not just homeless. He's not just eating crumbs that fall from the table of the rich man. His body's covered in sores. He doesn't have physical health. He doesn't have material wealth. He doesn't have security. He doesn't have anything. But as Jesus tells the parable, they die, and Lazarus goes directly to the bosom of Abraham. And the rich man who Jesus said fared sumptuously day to day, he goes to hell. And in looking up in hell, that's when he asked that Lazarus would come and dip his finger in water and cool his tongue, for I am tormented in these flames.
Gerrit One of the major points of that story is that the blessings of righteous living, the most important ones, the ultimate ones, come in the next life. Why does that matter? It matters because it can actually cause a faith crisis for us. If I go on my mission and I really believe that as long as I keep the mission rules and I pray fervently every day and I study my scriptures and I do my best, that God will bless me with baptisms and success, well, what happens then when I don't have any success? And do you find yourself like Marlene, where you say, well, there's only two things that can be at fault here. Either I'm not worthy enough or I'm not working hard enough. And of course, as we talked about in those podcasts, there's actually another will that's operative, other people's will, and we are in this mortal realm.
Gerrit I'd like to share, I know I've shared it before, but I'd like to share it again, part of this talk from Elder Uchtdorf. This was early on in his apostleship, but it stuck with me so much. It was a talk on the Word of Wisdom. We don't get a ton of talks on the Word of Wisdom in conference, but the reason why it stuck with me wasn't because I put down a Marlboro and a Sanka at the time, and so I guess I better start obeying the Word of Wisdom. No more natty light for me. It was because Elder Uchtdorf was both very vulnerable in talking about his faith and his youth, and also because of the important principle that it taught me. The talk is from 2010, the priesthood session of general conference, April of 2010, and it's called Continuing Patience.
Gerrit And part of it, he's talking about how we don't always receive all the things we want to receive when we want to receive them. And one of the subheadings of that talk is the Lord's way in time. So I'm going to quote from this. The children of Israel waited 40 years in the wilderness before they could enter the Promised Land. Jacob waited seven long years for Rachel. The Jews waited 70 years in Babylon before they could return to rebuild the temple. The Nephites waited for a sign of Christ's birth, even knowing that if the sign did not come, they would perish. Joseph Smith's trials in Liberty Jail caused even the prophet of God to wonder, how long? In each case, Heavenly Father had a purpose in requiring that his children wait. Every one of us is called to wait in our own way. We wait for answers for prayers. We wait for things which at the time may appear so right and so good to us that we can't possibly imagine why. Heavenly Father would delay the answer. I mean, obviously, again, when we break away from the talk, it's a righteous desire to want to baptize people on your mission.
Gerrit It's a righteous desire to want to be able to share the gospel with other people. So why am I not getting it even if I'm doing the things I'm supposed to do? Back to the talk. I remember when I was preparing to be trained as a fighter pilot. We spent a great deal of our preliminary military training in physical exercise. I'm still not exactly sure why endless running is considered an essential preparatory part of becoming a pilot. Nevertheless, we ran and we ran and we ran some more. And this is the part that I want to focus on. This is young Elder Uchtdorf, a young man, growing up in Germany at a time when there are very few members of the church living there. What does that mean? It means that his whole life, he would have been an outlier to the people around him. I don't know if you know this, but Germany has an entire month where they celebrate drinking alcohol. And they also, you know, smoking and the drinking of both tea and coffee is essentially ubiquitous.
Gerrit Almost everyone does it. So think of how many times young Dieter had to explain that because of his faith, he wasn't going to drink alcohol, that he wasn't going to smoke, that he wasn't going to... And so as they approach all this physical exercise, the very fact that he has been an outlier in keeping the Word of Wisdom causes him to have some introspection that actually causes him some trouble. Back to his talk. As I was running, I began to notice something that frankly troubled me. Time and again, I was being passed by men who smoked, drank, and did all manner of things that were contrary to the gospel, and in particular, to the Word of Wisdom. I remember thinking, wait a minute, aren't I supposed to be able to run and not be weary? But I was weary. And I was overtaken by people who were definitely not following the Word of Wisdom.
Gerrit I confess it troubled me at the time. I asked myself, was the promise true or was it not? I love this talk because of the vulnerability of Elder Uchtdorf as an apostle explaining that when he was a young man, he had a faith question. I don't know if we want to call it a crisis, but what happened? Because he had endured at least some societal ostracization for practicing the Word of Wisdom, if not some kind of persecution, he had come to believe that the fact that he followed it would translate into immediate, temporal, physical blessings.
Richard And as the question is brought up in the email, sometimes we are obedient to a thing and then hoping for there to be a benefit for that thing. As it relates to Doctrine and Covenants, Section 89, it's actually pretty specific as it says if you do these things, then these things.
Gerrit But what does run and not be weary mean? Does it mean I'm faster than every man in my unit? Does it mean that I'm going to suddenly become the best basketball player ever just because I'm obeying the Word of Wisdom? I don't know that we know what it means. In fact, part of that promise is that you will have great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures, revealed to you. One thing that's also interesting about Elder Uchtdorf's talk here is there isn't an easy resolution. You know, as Dan, I love how thoughtful Dan was. He said, you know, maybe there isn't really an answer for this. I'm obviously not, I'm not God. I don't know how things work. So I don't know how the tick marks of blessings work in this life or the next. And that's okay to not know. I think the problem actually comes when we think we do know. And so then we can no longer reconcile.
Gerrit I paid my tithing faithfully my whole life. Why would God let me lose my home? Because we thought that paying tithing meant that we would be immune from any financial distress. The people who lost everything in the Kirtland Safety Society were the faithful members of the church, because they were the ones that were trying to do what Joseph had talked about in pooling the money together. I think of Amanda Barnes-Smith, who happens to be in Hans Mill the night that the Livingston County militia attacks and massacres everyone. She didn't even live in Hans Mill. Why was she on her way? She was walking to far west. Why? Because Joseph Smith had received a revelation that said, go to far west. And so her and her family was on their way to far west. And because they were following the commandment, they were there when they were slaughtered, when her husband and her son were murdered and her other son was maimed.
Gerrit The reality is she could easily shake her fist at heaven and say, God, why didn't you protect me since I was keeping your commandments? You know what prospering in the land means to me? Not having my son and husband murdered. That's what it means to me. And for Elder Uchtdorf, he clearly thought, well, as he tells us, that what he thought the blessings of the Word of Wisdom would mean is that, you know what? All these guys are breaking the commandments. All of them are doing all kinds of sinning. I'm going to be by far the most physically fit person there. And then the guy who's smoking three packs a day unfiltered passes him while they're running. Well, now what? And one of the things I love about it is that he's so honest that he didn't get the answer right away. They had a question, wait a minute, how am I being blessed with this if it's not the blessing that I want it to be? The answer didn't come immediately, he says. But eventually I learned that God's promises are not always fulfilled as quickly or in the way that we might hope.
Gerrit They come according to his timing and his ways. Looking back, I know for sure that the promises of the Lord, if perhaps not always swift, are always certain. So I really want to focus on that. God's promises are not fulfilled as quickly as we want or in the way that we might hope. And so I think when we say, you know what? We are going to study the Book of Mormon as a family every single day. And you know what else? Because of that, I am going to get a better job at work and I'm going to make more money for my family, which is a righteous desire. And we study the Book of Mormon and we do all these things. And not only do we not get the better job, I get laid off from my job. Well, now what? I've been saying in my personal prayers, I've been thinking to myself, if only we just follow the commandments of President Nelson, we make the Book of Mormon study, we do it the way that we're supposed to do it.
Gerrit I connected that commandment to a promised blessing that I hadn't actually been promised. And I think that that is the dichotomy. As Dan says, I don't think we have an answer. I don't think there's a way to know that if I only do X and Y, that I will avoid bad things, that I'll baptize a hundred people in Barcelona, or that I will get the job I'm looking for at work. At times, the blessings of the Lord will take those forms. And at other times, it will take other forms. My experience is that it's very difficult to assign reasons for why things happen. As a historian, we do it all the time. We try to sort things out to say, okay, well, X happened, and then because of X happened, Y happened, and after Y happened, Z happened.
Gerrit But as a historian, I'm using documents, and I'm using events, and I'm using rationality. As a believer, I don't really have those same things open to me, because it might make perfect sense to me that if I follow certain commandments, that God blesses me in a certain way. But as the Lord reminds us, my ways are not thy ways, right? My thoughts are not thy thoughts. Just because something seems to be a logical conclusion to us doesn't mean that it actually is. And for all the people who, you know, lift themselves up, and they start out poor, and as they strive in the Gospel and get an education, they end up having made a great deal of themselves, there are also people that haven't go the other way. There are rich members of the Church who lose everything trying to defend the Church and to pay for things of the Church.
Gerrit Are they just not faithful? Are they just, if only they were more righteous, would they have made their wealth back? I think the problem comes in trying to assign it. I believe God blesses us, but I believe that when he's talking about people being blessed, he's talking about it collectively. He clearly can't be talking about it individually, because Joseph dies in a great deal of debt. So he can't be saying, oh, Joseph's going to be prospered in the land. And as I said, there's many other examples of that as well. Now, before we leave our incredibly French mailbag.
Richard We have one more. This one's a little bit longer of an email. This comes to us from from sister so and so. Sometimes we when we get emails from people that are, you know, they're glowing with this or that or whatever. We give the name, but when those are the emails, we just make up.
Gerrit Dave doesn't even exist. Dan doesn't exist.
Richard Great question, Dave. Thanks for asking.
Gerrit Ari, thank you so much. Like there's two Ari's in the same ward in Missouri. There's not even members in Missouri as far as I know. Now I'm going to name the email. Now you've done it.
Richard Now you've done it. But when we get, one of the things that's actually very touching in this is we get emails from people that are really having struggles, either for themselves or for family members. And so when we get those kinds of emails, we like to redact them as much as possible, not give names.
Gerrit You know, names have been changed to protect them.
Richard That's right. So first of all, I just wanted to thank you for these podcasts. I absolutely love them. I look forward to these every week. Many have helped me understand more about why things happen the way they did. Many things I have missed in my own readings or in our gospel doctrine class. I listened to them all and some a few times. My favorite ones so far are two and three, which are good, but of poor, poor sound quality.
Gerrit I mean, I really peaked early. And by that, I mean before we started doing the podcast.
Richard For me, those helped me at a time when my family is falling apart. My dad has left the church and is now preaching loudly against many of their teachings. I am far from being knowledgeable about the scriptures, so it is hard for me to disagree with him in a way to prove he is wrong. I feel that I have the gift of discernment and can feel what he is saying is wrong. My dad is the type that loves to read and study. It is probably the college professor in him. He has been reading the scriptures for about six plus hours a day and anything on the internet to help him further, to study further for over ten years. He has always had theories about things, things we do not need to know to get through this earthly life, but sometimes fun to ponder on, but not teach. I would say in 2012, he started reading dreams, end of time dreams usually, which led him to Julie Rowe. We knew the family she married into, so it seemed kind of fun at first to read her first book. The second book came out and I was no longer interested in it, but my sister and mom and dad continued on.
Richard Then the third and then her podcast. I couldn't even be in the house anymore when they listened to her. My dad couldn't get enough. This is where I see he spiraled. She taught multiple mortal probations. He soon believed this theory. He came up with a few of his own that weren't for fun. He believed them. And then began to search for having his calling and election made sure. He is so positive you have to have it in this life. And he started down a dark path on the internet until he found a guy that he called anonymous and was telling him everything he wanted to hear. Remember in Dallin H. Oaks talk in 2018, Truth and the Plan, he warns against this very thing. Well, my dad ends up meeting his new idol and he confirms how right my dad is. His name is Phil Davis, the chocolate factory vision guy. He is basically a Denver snuffer wannabe, apparently very smart and likes to pick apart the scriptures for his own agenda. Well, this is where I cannot battle.
Richard I cannot let him feel the warnings coming from these teachings, so he and my brother and sister have joined this group. They called themselves the School of the Prophets. A few of their teachings are that the church was condemned because they could not live the higher law. The church name was changed because of that. They were condemned because they did not finish the temple in Nauvoo, and they believe that Brigham Young killed Joseph Smith so that he could practice polygamy. So he does not sustain Russell M. Nelson. In fact, they say he is evil, and I belong to the great and abominable church. They live next door to me, so this has been really hard.
Gerrit That is tough.
Richard Yeah, I can't imagine. And going to church with all of the ward, knowing how crazy he went is so much fun. She gives an example of a Facebook post that he shared about Joseph Smith that, Gerrit, you're going to talk about in just a second, but to conclude, where can I go to find accurate information? Not a big fan of the internet since I know people can put out fake information all the time. I don't need to go to him with an argument, but it's nice to know these things for myself. Sometimes just trusting the spirit is great, but sometimes I would like to see the proof myself. I realize that I may not always have that, but some validation is nice. Thanks again for doing the podcast. I hope they continue for a long time. I definitely look forward to them. Thanks again, Sister so-and-so.
Gerrit Man, it is very hard when you get comments or emails. I get posts and calls and all kinds of stuff all the time from people who are really struggling. And it's always when people are struggling most, it's when they're in a family situation where someone is leaving. And as Richard's talked about in a previous podcast, it's especially difficult when someone is seen as just intellectually superior or maybe they have more education than other people in the family. And then they use that to kind of browbeat the other members of their family. Well, I'm just smarter than you, and I know these sources and you don't, so that's how I know what's true. I mean, there are so many aspects to the claim that are being made that are not, that are not believed by historians. And I don't mean Latter-day Saints. I mean, go find a Presbyterian who writes on Latter-day Saint history and they will not say that these are correct things.
Gerrit These movements, you know, she referenced a couple that we've talked about before, Denver Snuffer and Phil Davis. These apostate movements, part of the reason why they gain traction in our day is because they seek to dismiss, well, first of all, it's very self-serving because, oh, the church has fallen. But guess what? I actually have the real truth that works out really well. That, you know, that the same person saying that it's fallen just so happens to also be the same person who has the solution. And it's them. But also, it allows them to avoid some of the more difficult discussions, right? Well, lots of people struggle with plural marriage. Even though we told Dave we're going to talk about it, you know what? Probably still not. Well, maybe. I don't know. We'll talk about it a little bit today. We'll talk about it a little bit today. That it's a real struggle. Now, again, we're being a little ethnocentric here. It's a real struggle if you happen to be a member of the church from certain areas in the Western Hemisphere.
Gerrit It is not a real struggle for some members of the church and other places. But if you are culturally from the Western Hemisphere, then yes, it's a real difficulty for many people, even though we aren't practicing it, even though the quickest way to get excommunicated is to call up your bishop and say, hey, Brady, I just got married to someone else. In Richard's case, it would be a real fight to the finish to see whether he would get excommunicated first or whether Becky would leave him first. Anyway, these movements like to argue that Joseph was a true prophet because everyone in the church today wants to believe that. But then say after that, the church was led by false prophets. Why? Well, because then they falsely attribute historically every teaching about plural marriage, every teaching about race and the priesthood that our church now repudiates and rejects. The things that make us feel most uncomfortable, they don't have to deal with because they just say, oh, yes, well, Brigham Young was a false prophet, or in this case, Brigham Young conspired to have Joseph Smith murdered.
Gerrit There is not, and let me reiterate this again, for however wonderfully intelligent your father might think that he is, as a professor, he should know better, that if you're going to make a historical argument about something, then you better find some actual experts in the actual field who actually are recognized by actual publications who agree with the position you're taking. I'm not saying that every academic has the right conclusions or does the right research. What I'm saying is, this group that he's affiliated with is making a historical argument. It's one thing to say, I just think that the church has fallen. Okay, that's a religious argument. When you say that the church has fallen and Brigham Young conspired to have Joseph Smith and Hyrum Smith murdered by having John Taylor and Willard Richards kill them, well, now you're making a historical argument.
Gerrit And the thing about history and about academia is that you actually have to have evidence for the things that you argue. There is not, and again, let me reiterate, there is not a Ph.D. holding professor of history that believes that Joseph Smith never taught or practiced plural marriage. But that's what these groups tell their followers. Because that is a way, because of course, none of them like, you know what, we never even taught it. That was all evil, Brigham Young. Joseph never taught it. But you can't find an actual historian to say it. Why? Because we have so many sources. So anyway, they post this meme that, again, this poor woman is being browbeat with, and maybe we'll put an image of it up. I'm not sure how we can have people see it. We can maybe put a link to it or something, although I don't really want to link to anything that they're doing.
Gerrit And it's in a big black box. And on one side of a column, it's split into two columns. On one side of the column, it says Joseph Smith's unedited journal. And then there's a line drawn down the page. On the other side of the column, it says Brigham's edited version. So already here's a claim that's being made. Here's Joseph's journal. And Brigham changed Joseph's journal, right? Because on the right side, you have certain discussion, and on the left side, you have something that's more. At the bottom of the box, you have the quizzically looking, wait a minute, huh? kind of emoji face. And the question, why did he edit his journal? Now, the point of all memes, really the point of all political cartoons, all art is to convey a very big idea in just a small image, in just a little bit of information. So images have that ability, right?
Gerrit I can not even know how to read, but see an image of Adam and Eve being cast out of the Garden of Eden and understand some of the story, even if I'm not literate. In our day and age, this often takes the form of memes, where people take a very small snippet of obviously what is a much larger source, Joseph's Journal. I'm going to take one one thousandth of one percent of his journal, put it up, and then next to it put something that is different and say, you know, the implication, right? It's edited because of the topic. Again, the argument being made by this group is that Joseph Smith never taught or practiced polygamy. In Joseph's journal, which first and foremost, understanding the source is pretty important. They're clearly cutting and pasting these images, by the way, from the Joseph Smith Papers website. So they didn't actually do any of this research themselves. They cut and pasted.
Gerrit I mean, even the footnotes to the Joseph Smith Papers website are still in the they didn't even clean up their meme is what I'm saying. This was a lazy meme. You know, my wife would not be okay with it. It's from the 5th of October, 1843. And you can do this. You can go to josephsmithpapers.org. I want you to actually be able to access and know where these sources come from. So go to josephsmithpapers.org.
Richard We'll put the link there.
Gerrit We'll put that link and maybe also a link to the Clemson score that still bedevils Richard to this moment as he keeps glancing over to the side. His son is a huge Clemson fan. That's the reason why it matters to him. He doesn't even really care about Clemson, but he wants his son to be happy.
Richard As we're interrupting this game, we're going to the Clemson Notre Dame game later. If they lose, I'll be able to get cheaper tickets. I mean, this thing has financial implications.
Gerrit There's a lot of wider implications. We're not even talking about the money he spent on it. Anyway, the October 1843 Joseph Smith Journal. Thursday, October 5th, morning rode out with Esquire Butterfield to farm, etc. PM rode on Prairie to shoo some brethren some land. Eve at home walked up and down street with scribe and gave, frankly, it actually says instruction, but instruction to try those who are preaching, teaching, or the doctrine of plurality of wives on this law period. Joseph forbids it period and the practice there of no man shall have but one wife. So that's what's in the journal. And so the argument is being made by this group. C. Joseph taught against polygamy. Now, of course, what's going on in October of 1843 is that Joseph is currently practicing plural marriage and has been for years actually, for a couple of years.
Gerrit And so as there are rumors and allegations of it, Joseph is publicly, it says, walking up and down the street telling people you can't be teaching the practice of plural marriage. Now, when they say Brigham changed it, so first and foremost, important to understand your source. When they say, here's what Joseph wrote, well, Joseph didn't write this. In Nauvoo, all of Joseph's journals are kept by his scribes. In this case, Willard Richards. Willard Richards keeps the journal for him. And so you'll actually find that, I mean, because it's kind of weird, right? If you were to read this and thinking it was actually Joseph writing, it's very weird that Joseph writes, Joseph forbids it. Right? I mean, is Joseph just like, you know, is he a popular movie star and he just refers to himself in the third person? Now he's like, Joseph thinks that Joseph's going to have to go over there and get some more cornbread.
Gerrit Joseph's pretty excited about that. You know, Joseph's ready for that, right? I mean, it's obvious as well as with the handwriting, if you look at the original source, that while these journals are kept by Joseph's secretary and talk about the things Joseph does each day, these are not things that Joseph is himself writing and in most cases it appears he's not dictating it, but rather his scribe is trying to keep a daily record of Joseph's behavior. Now, when they say Brigham Young changed it, now that's a huge allegory. Brigham's edited version. Here is what they're talking about. Let me read again just what they have. Thursday 5th this morning I rode out with Esquire Butterfield to the farm, etc. In the afternoon rode to the prairie to show some brethren some land. Evening at home and walked up and down the streets with my scribe, gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives.
Gerrit For according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days. For there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred. And I have constantly said, no man shall have but one wife at a time unless the Lord directs otherwise. Now, where are they getting that other source? Well, they're getting that source from the multi-year project to write what is first called the history of Joseph Smith, but then will later be published as the history of the church. Willard Richards is actually someone who takes a very active participation in this. And he assembles some draft notes of what he wants to write about, about this. And then the way that they write the history of the church is they write it as if it's Joseph Wright. You'll notice the difference, right? For, according to this law, I hold the keys. Well, in the other one, it's Joseph and the third person.
Gerrit But the way they write the history is, if you've ever read, you know, the six volume history of the church, if you might have those, you know, old colored, coded volumes on your shelf, they write it in first person, which is actually a very common way of writing histories of people back then. As you take their third person accounts and you write them back into first person. So that it reads more like a narrative, more like a story. Now, that's a weird thing for us to do today. If you were to take all of my documents and write my biography and write it into, you know, I, Gerrit said, you know, I mean, you would say, well, that that's weird, because if you're not, Gerrit, why are you writing that? But it's actually a very common form of biographical writing in the 19th century, which, of course, this meme doesn't doesn't describe that at all, nor the project of it. And as they're doing that, they consult multiple different sources, and they will move back and forth between sources very rapidly.
Gerrit You know, Willard Richards will include this part of Joseph's journal, this part of William Clayton's journal, this part of a letter Joseph wrote, and this part of the church minutes without ever telling the reader where he's getting the source of the information. Now, again, at josephsmithpapers.org, they have a great link that you can go to that will show you on the daily entries of the history of the church what sources the historians were using to write the history. Now, it still might be troubling to someone, well, wait a minute, there's this addition to, you know, Joseph has the keys and he's the one who can confer it. Well, I don't know what the historians writing this are referring to. It's possible that they have a conversation with someone like Brigham Young, and he says, oh, well, Joseph was saying that because, you know, he was forbidding people preaching the practice of plural marriage unless they had authorization.
Gerrit They were acting like they could just do it. Now, while that might make someone feel uncomfortable, the point of this meme is to simply say, you know, the only reason why you think that the church taught polygamy is because Brigham Young went in and altered Joseph's journal. First of all, Joseph's journal remains completely unaltered.
Richard I was going to say, we have, so we will have both links to the original journal and then the other thing. It's crazy for the church to then post both of these things.
Gerrit Well, we didn't realize how intrepid her dad was going to be.
Richard Oh, I got it. He discovered it.
Gerrit Yes. Well, and so that's the other thing, right? Because the shock value of this is, I bet you didn't know that this happened. Well, frankly, I hate to break it to your father. I did know that it happened, and my guess is I understand better how the history of the church was created than he does. Just like whatever he was a professor in when he taught at the university, he would know that better than me. The idea behind this is, oh, look, look what I found. Look what they're hiding from you. And again, I hate to break it to him and all of the Phil Davis acolytes. Historians know. We're well aware. We're well aware that the portion of Joseph's journal, this portion that's copied into the history of the church, expands upon it, not just here, but literally everywhere. Everywhere it's expanded upon. In some cases, it's expanded upon through eyewitness testimony. You talk to the person that Joseph was talking to and you add more information. Sometimes from a letter. Sometimes we don't know where it's expanded from.
Gerrit But here's the point. That is not the only reason why we think Joseph Smith taught and practiced polygamy, but that's what this meme wants you to think. Look, the only reason you think Joseph ever taught and practiced is they just added that in later. Well, that and the hundreds of other sources that exist that are conveniently left out of this meme. And so that's the dishonesty. Again, I realize that someone who might be enamored with Julie Rowe or with the Phil Davis group, you see a giant wide conspiracy all around you. But here's the reality. Latter-day Saint scholars and atheist scholars and Presbyterian scholars and Jewish scholars and Catholic scholars and every scholar, every person who's made a name for themselves in writing 19th century history related to Latter-day Saints, all of them believe that Joseph taught and practiced plural marriage because of the weight of the sources.
Gerrit So this meme is very disingenuous. First of all, it doesn't show Brigham changing anything. Brigham will have the history read to him at times, but even that, I can only verify some places where he vets it before it's ever published. Maybe the scribes are simply providing more clarity because they know that there's only one person who has the keys. Of course, there's other times that Joseph teaches something like that, so maybe they feel justified in adding that in there. Regardless, this is not the only source on Joseph Smith plural marriage that exists. There are dozens and dozens of sources. It's very common for people affiliated with these certain apostate groups to say, well, you know, Doctrine and Covenants section 132, that wasn't written until years later, and it wasn't added to the Doctrine and Covenants until 1876. Yeah, it's added to the Doctrine and Covenants in 1876, because that's the next edition of the Doctrine and Covenants after Joseph's murder.
Gerrit Joseph's murder, there is an addition in 1844, and it's not included, along with dozens of other revelations that Joseph has received that are not included, and then it's added in 1876. The argument goes, you know what? I'll bet Brigham Young just wrote that. Well, there are some problems with that. One, we have William Clayton's actual journal. He's the scribe for that revelation. And what do you find in his journal? A notation on the day that it's received saying that he received that revelation. So now your conspiracy actually goes further than you think it does. Now William Clayton actually conspired to write in his journal many years after Joseph's already teaching plural marriage, but a year before you claim Brigham Young was going to murder Joseph in order to get him to be able to...
Richard That's how deep it goes.
Gerrit It goes so deep. That in fact, Clayton wrote contemporarily in his journal that he was receiving a revelation that he of course wasn't actually receiving because that's going to be something that's later written, but he knew that it was going to be later written. You can see the circles that are being run in. Look, anyone can believe whatever they want to believe. My dander is raised when someone begins to make a historical truth claim that's not historically accurate. If you don't want to believe that President Nelson's a prophet, there are many, many other billions of people in the world who don't believe he's a prophet. But if you're going to make the argument that it's historically provable that Joseph Smith never taught or practiced plural marriage because of this one difference between Joseph's journal and the published history of the church, well, then it's a terrible argument.
Gerrit It's not actually historical. If you could point this out in every other single instance that polygamy is mentioned with every other source, then maybe it'd be a good argument. And even then, I doubt it would convince most historians. Because in order to believe that Joseph never taught or practiced polygamy, you would have to reject the witnesses of dozens and dozens and dozens of men and women. The very women that we say that we feel so bad for because of the fact that they were forced to practice polygamy, people say things like that, those same women were calling them liars. Because they're the ones saying what they did. You can only criticize it so far before you actually criticize the very women who said they had a spiritual experience that convinced them to practice it. Like Eliza Arseneau or Lucy Walker Kimball, the reality is that plural marriages are very difficult. And as I'll talk about in a future podcast, but maybe never, there are so many sources surrounding it that this is a perfect example of why it is so difficult to talk about the topic.
Gerrit This person in this pithy little meme for which they did not provide any historiography, didn't inform people how Joseph's journal worked, nor how the history of the church worked. In fact, claiming that Brigham edited it means you're actually making a false historical claim, since Brigham isn't the one writing this. That in an attempt to convey this, because you think, ah, it's perfect, it's black and white, it's cut and dried. Anyone who believes this is being misled, you're frankly not doing your due diligence. You're trying to make an easy argument. And as I said before, easy arguments are almost always incorrect to a certain degree. They just are, because there's a lot more nuance, especially when you're talking about multiple different sources from the past. I don't think this is going to convince your father. I don't think it's going to convince anyone with that group, because the point isn't actually to get to the historical truth of things.
Gerrit If it was, this meme would have a giant, instead of a giant heading about Brigham Young lying, it would have a giant heading of historical sources are varied and Joseph's journal was kept by a different scribe. So we're not entirely sure you'd have that. If the point was for you to understand history, then they would help you understand the source they're quoting. But it's not the point. The point is to do a gotcha. The point is to say, see, see, look what they've done. What else have they done? But like I said, you can't find a non Latter-day Saint historian who's going to make the argument that Joseph never taught or practiced polygamy. It's not because they're desperately trying to defend President Nelson. It's because it's not a good historical argument. Hopefully that helped. I know that this is a little confusing and convoluted. I think it's further convincing me that we should never talk about polygamy again.
Richard Until next week.
Gerrit Until next week when we, all of Dave's hopes and dreams come to fruition and we talk about the one topic he said he didn't care about. I think that we are going to be recalcitrant like that going forward. Thank you very much.
Intro Thank you for listening to the Standard of Truth podcast hosted by historian Dr. Gerrit Dirkmaat. If you know anybody that could benefit from the material in this episode, please share it with them. And for more resources, visit standardoftruth.com. Until next time.

Quote board

Make a share card from any line

Okay, so just like he's betting the Red Sox, he's betting the outcome of our tour.

GerritBanter

Look, I know that Jesus Christ lives through the Holy Spirit.

GerritInsight

Well, I think one of the other most important takeaways is that the job of a gospel doctrine teacher is difficult, but don't make stuff up.

RichardInsight

I too would like to be underemployed and have a podcast that generates no revenue.

GerritBanter

But the lilies of the field aren't driving BMWs, right?

GerritBanter

I think the problem actually comes when we think we do know.

GerritInsight

I connected that commandment to a promised blessing that I hadn't actually been promised.

GerritInsight

Now he's like, Joseph thinks that Joseph's going to have to go over there and get some more cornbread.

GerritBanter

And as I said before, easy arguments are almost always incorrect to a certain degree.

GerritInsight

More from this episode

Claim checkThings people say, and what the episode shows.

Claim check

What critics say, and what the episode found
Brigham Young edited Joseph Smith's journal to make it look like Joseph practiced polygamy.
Joseph Smith never taught or practiced plural marriage; that was all Brigham Young.
Keeping the commandments guarantees the specific blessing you're praying for.
Take it to classReady to use in a lesson or a talk.

Take it to class

Ready to copy into a lesson or a text

Two rules from a history methods class are good for Sunday School too: you can't make anything up, and you can't leave anything out.

Elder Uchtdorf (2010): "The promises of the Lord, if perhaps not always swift, are always certain." Blessings come on God's timing and in God's way.

Be careful not to attach a promised blessing to a commandment when God never made that promise.

When a meme claims a hidden historical secret, ask what the source is, who wrote it, and what other sources it leaves out.

Banter binThe funniest moments in this episode.

Banter bin

The running jokes, for people who skip ahead
The French-Canadian mailbagNamed for a Quebec postmaster turned Supreme Court justice, which leads into Richard's family being kicked out of Lyon in 1690 (0:39, 1:21).
Corps Sergeant Major LeDucDave's new title for Richard, the highest Mountie rank, after the show asked for titles (1:58).
Red Sox picksCallback to the sports-gambling format change that lost every pick; Gerrit says Richard needs his bishop Brady to step in (2:48, 6:06).
Rachel's mom signs up for the tourThe tour filled in a week, and Rachel's mom's real name is coming (4:45, 5:45).
Polygamy in season 38 or 39Dave says he doesn't care if they ever get to polygamy, so now they have to (11:53, 1:07:23).
Two iPads of footballRichard watches Clemson on the side, says "Potter" for "parter," and needs cheaper tickets if Clemson loses (12:48, 13:06, 19:08, 52:04).
Springville juggernautGerrit hopes his son's ninth grade team only loses by 40 (14:58).
Peaked earlyListeners love episodes two and three, which had terrible sound (40:14).
Becky or the bishopWho gets to Richard first if he takes another wife (46:04).
The Phebe Draper Palmer Brown MailbagSend Gerrit and Richard your question.

The Phebe Draper Palmer Brown Mailbag

Your question could be next week’s episode
Questions from Litners drive a lot of episodes. Send yours. If it makes the show, Richard reads it on air.
General ConferenceGeneral Conference talks that cite a scripture read in this episode.

In General Conference

Talks from the latest General Conference that cite a scripture this episode reads or names on air
October 2026 General Conference · cites D&C 132Come to the Lord in His Holy HouseElder Gerrit W. GongElder Gong lays out three doctrinal foundations for temple worship: eternal families, moral agency, and the Holy Spirit of Promise, which makes honored covenants binding.October 2026 General Conference · cites Isaiah 55:8The Ninety and TenElder Michael A. DunnElder Dunn recalls a 100-mile ultramarathon in which, at mile 90, he wanted to quit until his running partner Ted promised to get him to the finish.October 2026 General Conference · cites D&C 130Christ-Centered UnityPresident Dieter F. UchtdorfPresident Uchtdorf, recalling his own baptism in a public swimming pool, teaches that baptism is an individual ordinance that also joins us to a covenant people.

Summaries, themes and lessons for every talk are on What Did They Say?

Go deeperWhere to read more.

Go deeper

Deep dives the episode points toward
The Joseph Smith Papers' notes showing which sources were used for each day of the History of the Church (57:23).
Elder Uchtdorf's April 2010 talk "Continue in Patience" and its section on the Lord's way and time (26:17).
Haun's Mill and Amanda Barnes Smith's account of the massacre (32:33).
William Clayton's 1843 journal and the recording of D&C 132 (1:02:18).
SOT Litner · S2E40.