B (2:52)

I see. So you're combining for a family night activity. You're casting bread religiously and also, oh, look, he's really hungry over here. And the duck comes and gets it.

C (3:04)

It was funny when I mentioned this to my kids, they responded to that tradition as being kind of weird. And then I reminded them that we do baptism and what that must seem like to a person that isn't Christian, how weird that was likely is. And I said, cut the Jews some slack.

B (3:25)

But, I mean, is it more weird than. Than building a tent outside?

C (3:32)

No. Look, suot's coming up.

B (3:37)

But you can.

C (3:38)

Like my uncle, you can order it on Amazon. Just come set it up, put some sticks on top, call it a day.

B (3:46)

I feel like that defeats the. It defeats at least the. The intent. I mean, maybe the spirit of the.

C (3:55)

Look, look. What?

B (3:56)

Get your Amazon. What.

C (3:58)

What do you want? For members of the tribe from New Jersey and New York to do.

B (4:03)

What do you want? Well, I mean, like, what if you're in, like, a studio apartment? What are you supposed to do then?

C (4:09)

Yeah, that's a fair. It's a fair point. But anyway, it's. We're entering the holiest times on the Jewish calendar, and I appreciate. Appreciate you letting me talk about that. It's. It's good fun had by all. Now, did we want to. Did we want to do the Christie's corner? Do we want to do Phoebe Draper?

B (4:29)

I mean, sometimes do it anyway, so I guess we might.

C (4:32)

The last. The last two people have pointed that out.

B (4:35)

Well, very few, actually. This last time, we skipped it, no one said one word, so that's the thing.

C (4:40)

The first time you skipped it, lots of comments. Second time, they just assume we gave up. Like, we give up on most things.

B (4:46)

I. I took it as they didn't do their due diligence. Right. So they're not caught up on the podcast. They weren't trying to be ready for Sunday. They were like, well, it's a fifth Sunday lesson. What difference does it make to me? And that's why they didn't notice.

C (5:01)

I did have a friend come up to me at church on Sunday, and he's in a different ward, but we. We crossed paths in the hall, and he's like, hey, I love the episode where you said that you're sponsored by Briggs and Stratton. So he's like, I'm so close to Being caught up. I thought that was funny.

B (5:19)

That is funny. Yep.

C (5:20)

Because we're especially. It's funny because we're a Toro family, obviously.

B (5:24)

Well, frankly, we are what anyone will give us anything. And we have zero actual sponsors. We have no actual sponsors, except for the good people who sign up for the premium content as a way of defraying the expenses of producing the podcast. And of course, if you are, if you are a missionary, if you're a full time missionary, we will send you the premium content for free. So it's the main reason to serve a mission. The number one reason. Get free content. Number two, if you happen to labor all your days and brings every one soul into the kingdom, my father our grace will be rejoin them. That's number two.

C (6:11)

My son texted me because his missionary email expired last week and he sent me access, he lost access and he sent me his private email and he's like, can I get access or do I need to go on another mission? And I. What do you think? I said?

B (6:27)

I think you said you find a woman to get sealed to in the temple and we'll talk. This will be your wedding present.

C (6:35)

No, I said you got to go on another mission.

B (6:36)

Oh, okay. Well, there you go.

C (6:39)

That would be nice. If I, If I were to have grandkids, I'd think about it. But anyway, so it was so. Yes. And so even three months after your mission, you still technically have access until that email goes away. But yeah, so please send them. I will be spending the majority of the time on this podcast while Garrett is absolutely trashing presidents from the 19th century. I will be adding missionaries one after another to the Google Drive and it'll be much fun had by all. It'll be great.

B (7:09)

Yeah. So if you are a full time missionary, if you have a full time missionary and you think they'd like to have access to the podcast, I mean, it's all of the podcasts, not just the premium. It's. It's all of them send an email to us with their missionary email and that's how we can get them added to the podcast and because it'll give them a Google Drive that they can use. So let's. Yeah, let's. Let's do Chrissy's Corner. When you want to look smart in Sunday school, if you want your friends to think you're cool, when you want to seem wise and not a fool, it's Christy's Corner. Okay? Someone pointed out that they love the fact that the Christy's Corner stinger is none of the Things in it are actual. Right. If you want to look smart in Sunday school, not. Not actually be smart. Right. No, that's accurate. That's what to think that you're cool. It actually isn't cool. It's all a sham. Christie's Corner.

C (8:11)

Yeah. I feel like it nails it. I feel like. I feel like the stinger nails it.

B (8:15)

The stinger. So none of the things that are going on are actually changing your. Who you are. It's. It's just changing the way people perceive you.

C (8:28)

The whole premise behind Christie's Corner is so that my sister in McKinney, Texas, can make a comment in Sunday school that no one's heard of because no one listens to our podcast. And reward.

B (8:39)

So that she can become the Relief Society president. Right. Because that was the. The end game.

C (8:44)

Was that the hierarchy, primary president, young women's president.

B (8:48)

I feel like she's. I mean, she's probably looking for Stake Relief Society president at this point. I feel like she set her eyes high. The shiny ring. Her precious is the. Is the Stake Relief Society presidency.

C (9:04)

So we do. We did have a friend of the show. Currently serving a mission headed down to Brazil, Ethan has been made a district leader in the mtc.

B (9:18)

Yeah. And it's sad because I really liked Ethan.

C (9:22)

It was right to his head.

B (9:24)

Well, I mean, I. I don't know. I haven't talked to Ethan since he was made the MTC district leader.

C (9:31)

Yeah. But he's become too busy.

B (9:34)

We know from Joseph. We know. We've learned by sad experience that it's the nature of almost all men. What Joseph didn't say. I'm sure he knew that there'd be eventually an mtc. It's the nature of almost all men. Caveat. And all MTC district leaders to immediately. As soon as they get a little authority as they suppose or the mail key to immediately begin exercising unrighteous dominion. So. I mean, Ethan, you seem like a great guy. Oh, he's had a lot of fun together on the tour.

C (10:14)

Yeah, he's a great. He's a great young man. Great, great missionary. That was prior. I don't.

B (10:18)

Right now, as I speak. Right now, you are condescendingly talking to the other elders in your district, telling them that they need to do better.

C (10:29)

I envision Ethan sitting on a throne like Ramses now that he's the district.

B (10:36)

Leader and people have to avert their eyes as they bring him some of their care packages from home.

C (10:42)

It's the scene from Ten Commandments when everybody from all of different countries are bringing in and dancing and bringing grapes and the people of Ethiopia and the people of.

B (10:52)

That's exactly what it is. Well, so this covers doctrine covenant session 106 to108. 107 is obviously a very important revelation on the priesthood and the way that the priesthood, not only its history, but also the way that these various quorums function. But 107, you know, so here's the cool thought that you can share. Although this now is partially in the section heading because the section headings were rewritten. So you know, other people who read the section heading might know this, but this is one of these really unique revelations where it's actually a revelation that was received in two parts. And the really crazy part about it is the second half of the revelation is actually the part that was received first in November of 1831. And then sometime after that the remaining portion, which becomes the first portion is received. And when they publish them, they publish them together in the Doctrine and Covenants because they're related. And it really shows that Joseph obviously through the Lord has a very hands on approach to something like Doctrine and Covenant Section 107. Look, I mean, I would guess, Richard, have you ever, in your times as being a bishopric, have you ever gone to section 107 to reference it?

C (12:37)

Yeah, yeah, especially, especially when we're, we're teaching the Aaronic Priesthood.

B (12:42)

Yeah. Because. Because what are some of the things that are in section 107? Well, I mean, not to put you on the spot, but yeah, no, there's.

C (12:50)

So many done there.

B (12:51)

Christie's Cornerstone.

C (12:52)

There's just, just so many things.

B (12:55)

There's just like a lot of stuff. It's just like. So it's like crazy. All this stuff that's there, just so much stuff. Is that.

C (13:05)

That's what I think. I apologize. I was currently reading ahead to the, the Phoebe Draper Palmer Brown mailbag to make sure that I pronounce words properly like podcast and truth and Facebook.

B (13:18)

Well, so here's one thing to notice as you're going through it. It's going to make references to the Articles of the Church. Know that when it makes that reference, it's making the reference to Doctrine and covenants section 20, that's the articles and Covenants of the Church. But it also is this revelation that talks about the various offices in those priesthoods and in part what their responsibilities are. It also talks about the, the church court system and how people can appeal the responses from church courts. I mean, so there's an awful lot that's there but let me give you an example of something that Joseph apparently adds to the text on the basis of what he has learned. So if you look at, if you look at, let's say, verses 69 and 70, this always raises a little bit of questions for people about a bishop being a literal descendant of Aaron. Nevertheless, a bishop must be chosen from the high priesthood unless he's a literal descendant of Aaron. For unless he's a literal descent of Aaron, he cannot hold the keys of that priesthood. So that's what it says in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants. Well, what did the revelation say originally? Originally, it simply said that it becomes necessary to have other bishops or judges, inasmuch as there are other bishops appointed, they shall act in that same office. Well, actually, I'm reading a second place where it was added on. Sorry. A bishop must be chosen from the high priesthood, and it originally said that he may be set apart unto the ministering of temporal things. So it originally said nothing about a literal descendant of Aaron. So when that's first recorded in the Book of Commandments and Revelations, that information is apparently something that Joseph either hasn't received yet or it's information that he hasn't publicly told yet. So it read differently. And then with the emendation, it then reads, he must be chosen from the high priesthood unless he's a literal descendant of Aaron. For unless he's a literal descendant of Aaron, he cannot hold the keys of that priesthood. So the other thing that's added, it goes, nevertheless, a high priest, right? You'll notice that part here. Nevertheless, a high priest that is after the order of Melchizedek is also added in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants before it said a bishop must be chosen from the high priesthood, may be set apart, that he may be set apart under the ministering of temporal things. So this whole idea of him being a literal descendant of Aaron and how instead he could be a high priest after the order of Melchizedek, that's something that Joseph now understands. And because Joseph now understands it, he's changing. He's changing the text here or he's adding this to the revelation because the information's important. We often have Latter Day Saints who feel troubled over the fact that Joseph Smith made amendations to the Revelations or that he made changes to the Book of Mormon. It's because we live in a culture that sees Scripture as absolutely sacrosanct that it can never change. Now, the same people telling you that the Bible can't ever change apparently have no Problem with the dozens of different translations from it, which use completely different words, but they claim they mean the same thing, even though they often don't actually mean the same thing. But. But, you know, I digress. I mean, these people are like, you can't. Every single word in the Bible is absolutely written by God. What about this word that was in the King James Bible that's no longer in the new international version? Well, it's. The same word is to change. Okay, so every word was literally written by God. Only God got that word wrong the first time. No, no, no. If you go back to the original, the problem is there is no original. Whenever anyone says you go back to the original Greek, they don't actually mean that. I know what they think they mean. Oh, we go back to the first time the Bible was written down in Greek. We don't have that. What we have is the earliest Greek manuscripts. We don't have, you know, Peter blocking out a bunch of Greek letters as the. All right, this is ready to go, guys. Let's pass this out. So. So that culture, that scriptures can't ever be changed, even with further light and knowledge. Well, that's not a belief that Latter Day Saints have. The entire purpose of Joseph Smith's translation of the Bible, the JST is for us to better understand God's will for us through that text. And there are some really important things that are corrected because people have erroneous beliefs based upon how they've interpreted some of these biblical scriptures in the past. And Joseph, through inspiration as the prophet of God, receives that revelation about how to change it. So I think that might be an interesting thing that your sister could leap up at the beginning of class and say that this is a very unique revelation, because first of all, you know, talk about the first shall be last, and the last shall be first. The earliest portion of when this revelation was earliest received, that portion was actually received in November of 1831. And it's the second half, basically verse 60 and on, and the earlier portion is received later. We don't know exactly when, but they're combined together. And. And they also demonstrate Joseph making changes to an existing revelation so that people can better understand the new light and knowledge that he's received. So have at it, Sister Hoskins. Hopefully you will become General Relief Society president soon.

C (20:23)

General. That's very good, Garrett. Well, so this. This first email from the Phoebe Draper Palmer Brown mailbag comes to us from Lindsay. Hey, doctors. I just wanted to thank you on behalf of my cousin, Elder Rodenheiser. He is serving in the Salt Lake City east area of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Mission and is predictably encountering tons of antagonists to the church. He's from Detroit. Could you imagine? He's from Detroit and he comes to Utah and he gets all more anti than he ever got when he was in Detroit.

B (20:57)

Oh yeah, for sure.

C (20:58)

Of course. Yeah for sure. He's only been out for two and a half months and was getting discouraged but finally started listening to the podcast last week and is already helping. He was able to debunk some silly Facebook anti Mormonism as he called it with truth and sources he learned from the podcast. Thank you so much for everything. Here are a few new missionary emails and she gave. She gave several with youth, my ward who are about to head to the mtc. Love you guys and your work more than I can express. Godspeed the right. That's very nice Lindsay.

B (21:29)

Thank you so much Lindsay. And you know, that's one of the reasons why we do this. It's hopefully one of the things that keeps us going long beyond when anyone else wants to listen the idea that a missionary somewhere might be on the verge of saying, you know what, maybe Solomon Spalding did write the Book of Mormon. He listens to what we have to say and then he's like okay, I'll go knock on another three doors but if they say the late war, I'm out. So you know Richard, I do need to comment. I feel like you read that last email like flawlessly.

C (22:07)

Well yeah, because I read it before as you were asking me questions about DNC 107 and my favorite. Yeah, well yeah, it's like I'm just reread. I'm reading it. Okay, is there any word that's a two syllable word that I need to practice and then go through it and. And then you're like so Richard, your favorite part about what said about bishops and DNC 107. I'm like what? But anyway, you button hooked me. But thank you so much. I appreciate it. I've hooked on phonics work for me. This next email is coming to us from David. My purpose in contacting you is to see if you have any recommendations of those topics most needed to inform and explain to youth today. As we know, each situation is unique. Still, some topics are more imperative to discuss than others before the youth encounter them in the world. Ultimately, on a personal level, I want my children to say I've heard all these before when they see these topics elsewhere, which is the counsel given by President Ballard inoculating the, the youth, because it's. You've said this a million times, Garrett. It's not. It's not the thing. It's that they haven't heard of the thing.

B (23:23)

That's often the issue and the embarrassment that comes. And when you have someone else telling you what it is your history is, or what it is you believe, and obviously in a dark, negative tone, that. That can really cause some emotional damage and it can hurt because, you know, you think to yourself, no, there's no possible way Joseph Smith ever taught or practiced polygamy, because if he did, I would have heard about that in church or in seminary. And, well, you know, you're at the mercy then of whoever's teaching gospel doctrine and whoever your seminary teacher is. And look, nearly every seminary teacher is at some point going to talk about that. That doesn't mean that every one of them are. And so, you know, it's a great question. There's a lot of things to focus on. Let me, let me say two things, the easy part. First, the church has created the Gospel topics essays, which I think were inspired, designed to help do that. These topics were, create, were, were selected, and the church, you know, pushed for their creation and then published them to help people understand the background, both the historical background and controversy surrounding some of these issues. So, for instance, there's a Gospel Topics essay on DNA in the Book of Mormon. Why? Well, because your child is likely at some point to have someone come up to them and say, well, you know, the Book of Mormon's false right, because they proved through DNA that didn't happen. Well, it's possible that your child's never even heard anyone even thinking about doing DNA studies. I'm thinking of my children. They haven't. Right. So the idea behind the essay is, well, what does an actual PhD geneticist say? What can you actually know and what can't you know? And not just what an anti Mormon subreddit says. If you had to figure on the ones, I mean, you could already guess, David, what ones are the most important to at least have a conversation about are the polygamy essays, which there are multiple of them. Nothing's really changed since Brigham Young's time, in the sense that whenever anyone is trying to win an argument with your children surrounding the gospel, the default position will always be polygamy. Because in America or in Canada or in Europe, polygamy is considered so heinous that there's an equation that no one could possibly be righteous or from God if they practice polygamy. The Great irony, of course of that is that the entirety of all monotheistic religions is based upon the descendants and the religion of people practicing plural marriage. So it's a very weird argument that the western world, where western culture overcame the scriptures. It's crazy, right, that you talk to a Protestant. The Bible's all you need. Every word in the Bible. The Bible's all you need. The Bible's all you need. The Bible's all you need. Right up to plural marriage. Then it's like, well, I know it doesn't say in there that plural marriage is a sin, but you know, it is. And that's why it's not commanded in places to do it as part of the old law. I mean, they actually fall all over themselves. Every word in the Bible is inspired by God. Well, why is the law of Moses giving the levert marriage instructions? If polygamy is a sin in the eyes of God, why isn't God saying so? Right? I mean, you know, does God really need to wait for, does he really need to wait for David to have Uriah killed to say, hey David, you're not living the way I want? How about the other 10,000? Well, he doesn't have that many, but other thousand wives you have, right? I mean like the issue where western culture deems polygamy always an evil. Now I'm not saying it's not sometimes an evil. Clearly we believe that there are apostate people that have practiced it in evil. I mean, we are not saying that it's not that it's always good. But for someone to claim that God could never command people to practice it. Is someone saying that the Bible isn't actually all the word of God? There's some parts of it that are, and those are the parts that I care about and those are the parts that I want to do. So plural marriage I think is the one that, you know, obviously maybe you don't want to do that with your 12 year old, but your 16, 17 and 18 year olds who probably, if you're not living in Utah, they've probably already heard these things. So giving them a historical grounding of understanding how was it even practiced and what sources actually exist and what we don't know about it, obviously the restrictions on the temple and priesthood, those are another major thing that you're going to want to cover with them. And again, we have a Gospel topics essay on that that discusses that as well as many other resources on churchofjesuschrist.org There are various things surrounding the first vision. Another thing that will often be brought up as well as the translation of the Book of Mormon. Those are ones that I hear pretty commonly from people who either have questions themselves or are dealing with people who are questioning their faith. Yeah, they said that Joseph Smith totally changed his whole story about the first vision. That. And that just shows that he's lying. I mean, if you spend time explaining there's multiple accounts of the first vision, well, then the shock value of that is pretty far gone. Someone comes up to your child and says, hey, you know that Joe Smith, you know, told different stories about the first vision. Right. They're not going to be, like, shocked. They're going to be like, oh, yeah. Throughout his life, he was asked multiple times about it and he gave multiple different accounts of it, which, of course, aren't all exactly the same because that's not how people talk, you know. So I think I really appreciate, David, what you're trying to do. That's what I would make my. I would use that as my guideline. I know that Richard did something similar. Richard, why don't you tell us how that worked out for you and your family?

C (30:48)

Yeah, no, we.

B (30:49)

Or are you also not paying attention to me again? I never actually know. Now I throw it over to you and you're out getting a pizza and it's just an empty chair with a microphone there.

C (31:00)

No. So actually, I'm glad. I'm glad you did throw it to me. And I was, I was, I was all. I was all ready. I was actually ready to talk about BYU's performance against East Carolina. But I can talk about this if you'd like.

B (31:11)

I mean, let's, let's, let's talk about this. But also, we're going to talk about byu.

C (31:16)

I'd say a bear came on pretty strong. He had some high completion rates. I was excited about.

B (31:21)

It's the best he's looked.

C (31:23)

Yeah, it was exciting.

B (31:25)

Yeah. Yeah. I will find out more when they play Colorado.

C (31:30)

That's true. Well, so actually, we did this for. When we're not discussing Jewish traditions on our family night, we like to discuss the different gospel topics essays. We did kind of all the gospel topics essays that you described. We've done those over multiple family nights for the very reason that you talked about and that President Ballard talked about. And what was interesting is that our junior high kids were hearing all of these things. That's actually the problem is that we think that by bringing up polygamy or race in the priesthood or these other things that, oh, they're too young and they, they, you know, they're already hearing it. I mean, and so that was a surprise. I know, I know. You did an Aaronic priesthood camp for our stake. This was crud. This was 10 plus years ago. And there was a little bit of controversy about it and talking about some of these, these issues before the gospel topics essays were either out or before they were well known. And you asked the young men how many have heard negative things about Joseph Smith. And almost every young man raised his hand. And then you asked what things? And they were saying some of the most offensive things.

B (32:54)

And it's crazy to see the look on the parents face because that fireside started with me starting to talk about it and parents with very angry looks on their face and their anger went to this shock as their daughter sitting next to them is like, I heard that Joseph Smith was a liar and that he lied about everything surrounding the first vision. And their parents, like, what in the, you know, they're, they're looking side to side like, yeah, who said that to you? Yeah, I heard that he just lied about polygamy so he could marry a whole bunch of teenage girls. I mean, yeah, they were things that they were already dealing with and especially with social media. Anything that you think your kids haven't heard about yet, I mean, outside of when they're supposed to do their chores, apparently they have, they have in some format. And so I really appreciate what David said. So what was your result of doing them with your, with your kids and your family?

C (33:59)

I mean, look, it's been, it's been really great. The goal was to read through these things and then to have a discussion. You know, we have about an eight year gap from our oldest to our youngest. And so with those that are on the younger side, we're going to have to do this again now that they're a little bit older and go through some of these again. But no, it was very helpful. And you know what's interesting? So one of the things Garrett likes to send me Calvinist Instagram reels and I like to send Garrett anti Mormon Instagram reels. I mean, that's the kind of the back and forth that way.

B (34:34)

That's how we rib one another. Yeah. Yeah. Hey, bet you haven't thought about this Calvinist argument. Richard. Yeah, makes it sound like I'm a Calvinist pastor. No, no, no.

C (34:44)

But it is funny. I mean, just in the last week I sent you an anti Mormon one and you sent me a Calvinist one. Anyway, it was interesting though because one of the, and He's, I don't know that he's anti, but he certainly is antagonistic and pokes fun and he's an ex Mormon and whatever. And one of the things in the video that I sent you, he was going out of his way to say, stop saying that. All of the witnesses just claim to see it with their spiritual eyes. It's easily defendable and it makes you look like you're just lying and making it up. And it was an interesting point saying, don't do this. I'm not saying that you have to believe it, but this is a terrible argument. Don't make it. And that was kind of the first time I've seen somebody on the more antagonistic side saying, hey, stop saying stupid stuff. But so while he's trying to defend the antagonists of the church, these Gospel Topics essays. And David goes on to talk about the. Oh, what's, what's the, what are the books that one of the books that you wrote.

B (35:46)

Let's Talk about book. Yeah. So the let's Talk about series from Deseret Book took scholars that were, you know, outside of myself, really good in their field and then and, and had them, you know, lay this all out in a book format with all the sources with the questions people might have. And so that's another way to do a deeper study. You know, these gospel topics essays are brief and short and accessible. And if people want to know more about that topic, that's, I think, the reason why Deseret Book created the let's Talk about series. So let's talk about polygamy. Let's talk about the translation of the Book of Mormon. Let's talk about the Book of Abraham, for instance.

C (36:31)

Yes. Anyway, David, thank you very much for the email. And Lindsay, thank you for the email. And Garrett, I think when last we left, you had gotten to the, you just gotten to the fall. And we're hoping to get to Zachary Taylor.

B (36:46)

So the fall of Adam.

C (36:48)

Yes.

B (36:49)

I thought you were talking about the fall of Chapultepec, the Mexican War, when Winfield Scott, you know, drove up there. But there's so much to cover. But we were talking about how in Iowa, the Latter Day Saints made this very fateful decision to switch their voting allegiance. Now, one of the things that is the greatest irony of all ironies is that the Democratic Party of Iowa had set up special polling places. They passed a special law, in fact, against the Whigs opposition, of course, to make it possible for these Mormons living in western Iowa to vote even though they were outside of these regularly organized counties. Well, when election day came and the Latter Day Saints all voted in Mass for the Whig candidates and not for the Democratic candidate. The same Democratic party that had ramroded this law through to try to get the Mormon votes, they then turned around and themselves said that their own law that they had passed was actually unconstitutional, and therefore none of the Mormon votes should count. So it's the greatest. It's the greatest demonstration of 19th century political hypocrisy that I think I've ever found. The very people who, against all kinds of opposition, forced a law through because they thought it would get them more votes when they realized it wouldn't, that they voted the wrong way, so to speak, they then claimed that their own law that they wrote and that they passed was unconstitutional so that they could throw out all of the votes.

C (38:55)

I have to imagine that. So that it had to be hilarious in some of the newspaper articles pointing this out. Right?

B (39:03)

In the Whig newspaper articles. Very hilarious. Because. Because this actually becomes a national. I mean, this isn't what we're talking about. We're still trying to answer questions about who's dead and in hell. No one even knows who's dead in hell right now. No one knows now why we're talking about it. Garrett spent most true five seasons of this podcast saying that there is no hell. Now we've got some unknown person who's rotting in hell. Garrett won't even tell us about it. Look, good things come to those who wait. Or if you listen to this podcast, they don't. And so you certainly had people mocking him. But it became a national issue because the representative from the House of Representatives for Iowa, instead of being a Democrat, the Whig won on the basis of the Mormon votes. All of the other statewide offices in Iowa still went to the Democrats. So the Democratic governor was elected barely. The Democratic senator. Right. The state House went to the Democrats, so the senators were Democrats because back then, the state House voted for the senators, but the congressional district that covered western Iowa, it went wig. So there was a gigantic. It became a national issue because it changed the makeup of the Congress. If you say that none of the Mormon votes count, well, then the Democratic representative won in the national legislature.

C (40:39)

Wow.

B (40:39)

It actually becomes a giant congressional investigation that, by the way, lasts years. By the time they adjudicate it, it's already been two years and it's beyond the election of the House. They finally adjudicate it as the Mormon votes were legal and they were binding by this congressional investigation.

C (41:04)

First of all, that's the most. That's the most Congress thing ever. You know what? Those votes that happened two years ago, they don't matter.

B (41:14)

Yeah, those count. I mean, in the end, there wasn't enough of a. You know, it wasn't like there was only one seat that determined who controlled Congress, so that it ended up not being essential on the national stage. But to the Latter Day Saints, what does it teach them? What does it teach Latter Day Saints about American political hypocrisy related to them? It seemed like the very last experience they got in an American state in Iowa on their way out of the country. Half of them are already out of the country. Was some type of political respect over the fact that they were Americans and voters right up until they voted the wrong way. And then the same Democratic newspapers in Iowa that were lauding the fact that the Latter Day Saints were staying in Iowa and what industrious people they are. You know, they've really helped out the building up of the wet. Those same papers immediately, overnight, talked about how the Mormons were nothing but a set of foreigners who shouldn't even have the right to vote in the United States and that they should all be driven from the state as quickly as possible. When people talk about politics ruling people's lives today, I really feel like they have not read things from the 19th century and. And you see these things today that are so, you know, they. They are filled with so much hypocrisy. Right. A governor who on one point will say, it's all about states rights. It's all about states rights. It's all about states rights. Will like a week later say, the federal government needs to intervene. The federal government has to intervene. The federal. Because people think when they engage in politics, because they're engaging in political theory, that there's some kind of ideological consistency going on. But political parties don't exist to keep ideology pure. They exist to win elections. And they've always existed to win elections. Their entire point is to win elections. And for the Democrats in Iowa, the Mormons were useful to them right up until they weren't useful to them. And the moment they weren't useful to them, they no longer defended and protected them, which was the same experience the Latter Day Saints had had everywhere. So what does this do? This reinforces the idea that the American political system is corrupt. And, you know, it's over this controversy over the elections in Iowa that Brigham Young shares his. You know, I've shared it on the podcast before, but you know what? Everyone's still all raging about politics. So I might as well share it again. That Brigham Young shares his famous quote, well, to, to Orson Hyde that I said, I've, I've shared it on the podcast before. But you have Latter Day Saints in Iowa who've been Democrats their entire life and all of a sudden you have the church essentially saying we're going to support the Whig candidate. Well, some of these people can't come to terms with that. You don't understand. I'm a Democrat. I'm a die hard Democrat. I will never vote Whig. I don't care what Brigham Young says. I am, you know, Right. On the other hand, you have people who feel like, you know, who are Whigs, who feel like because Brigham Young has expressed what he thinks should happen, that anyone who doesn't agree is just an apostate. So they take it to the radical other extreme. And it becomes the most extreme when Almond Babbitt, who is a multiple time stake president, leader of the church in multiple places, he is a very strong willed man. He is often, he has multiple times been cut off from the church but then brought right back. So I always say Almond Babbitt must have been, you know, he must have been the most amazing administrator ever because he's constantly being cut off or disfellowshipped from the church and then constantly being brought back and immediately put in a position of power. So he must have been like just incredible. He was, for anyone who's a Civil War buff, he was the George McClellan of latter day. So do you think anyone will get that?

C (46:18)

Yeah, no, no, you qualified it.

B (46:22)

Yeah. George McClellan was the leader of the army of the Potomac in the Civil War and McClellan was just not that great as a tactical general in fighting. And so as a result, Lincoln removed him from his position. But One thing that McClellan was really, really, really good at, he was incredible at organization, training, logistics, and his troops loved him. So Lincoln is not quite forced, but the army's in such tatters after some of the losses that he reappoints McClellan to lead the army again. And you know, McClellan is a he, he is someone who, or at least the rumor is that he's going to reappoint him again for that very reason. He's someone who's really, really good at logistics and terrible at actual battle tactics. So that that kind of seems what Alan Babbitt is like. He's clearly, he must be an amazing administrator. And also every time the prophet says anything that he doesn't agree with, he's Like, I'm not okay with that at all. And he just starts popping off. He's ruled by his politics. He's so political that other Democrats in D.C. so he's a Democrat. He goes to. He eventually will become the territorial delegate from Utah territory. He's so hyper partisan that other Democrats in D.C. will write to Brigham Young saying, you got to get this guy out of here. He's so over the top with everything he's saying. He's so partisan, he's going to keep people from letting you become a state, you know, kind of thing. So any Almond Babbitt, super Democrat, he's actually served in the state House in Illinois as a Democrat. So he's. He's not just a Democrat, you know, armchair. He's a Democrat politician and leader of the church there in Iowa. And Orson Hyde, who's now the president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, well, Orsonide creates a newspaper that is a very pro Whig newspaper. And Orson Hyde's gone all in on Whig ideology. And Alan Babbitt's so angry that he creates his own newspaper that attacks regularly Orson Hyde. And Orson Hyde's newspaper from the Democratic perspective. Well, imagine what this looks like to the rest of the Gentiles in Iowa. These two Latter Day Saint leaders are regularly excoriating one another in these public newspapers. And eventually, you know, Orson Hyde, you know, because he is the president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, he pulls rank and he disfellowships Almond Babbitt, which Salmon Babbitt is simply. I mean, this is like taking a shower at this point. He's been disfellowshipped many times.

C (49:23)

Yeah.

B (49:24)

And this is what prompts Brigham Young, when he finds out about it, to write this pretty harsh chastising letter to Orson Hyde, essentially saying, what are you doing? Politics don't matter at all. What Brigham Young wants to get across is political parties. Those are things of this world. They have no eternal existence. This is what he writes to him. Now, we don't care a groat about your political differences, okay? A groat's a worthless English penny. But we wish to say to you, to not allow trivial matters to influence you in the least. And never, no, never, no, never drag the priesthood into political gentile warfare. Let no religious test be required or the holy influence and power of the priesthood be brought to bear in any political question. If the intrinsic merits of all such matters will not furnish argument sufficient for all necessary purposes, then let them go. For it is better that the whole political fabric corrupt as we know it to be, that it should tatter and go to destruction than for one saint to be offended. Brigham Young utilized politics. That's the reason why they made the decision to vote for Zachary Taylor. But politics never determined why he believed what he believed. It's the kingdom of God or nothing. So just as a side note, if you ever find yourself criticizing the prophet or the church on the basis of the. The talking points of whatever political party you feel most closely aligned to, or whatever political talking head on social media or on. On the radio or on, you know, on a podcast, you are stepping away from that understanding that this is God's kingdom. It's the only thing that's actually going to matter when Jesus comes again. And I know that because politics do cover a lot of really serious moral and ethical and monetary issues, that it's easy to get very worked up about it. I'm not saying people can't have strong feelings about politics. What I'm saying is it's important to decide whether or not politics are your God. Do you really believe that God has given the keys of the last dispensation of the fullness of times to President Nelson and the quorum of the 12? And if you do, how crazy is it to criticize the church on the basis of what some non believer, or at best some trinitarian believer thinks what is right or what is wrong surrounding a certain issue? You may not think you're making a choice between God and mammon, but in that moment, you're saying, hey, this political scientist or this politician who I really, really, really admire, this podcaster, certainly not me that I really admire, they are making a better point than President Nelson. Well, God has established the means whereby you will receive truth from the heavens. And as Brigham Young says, look, if you can't settle these political questions by discussion, if by looking at the facts doesn't create a way whereby you can know exactly what you should or shouldn't do, then let it go. Let it go and lean into the things that the Church is teaching rather than to what your political party is preaching. So back to our story. That was a little bit of an aside. And by a little bit, I mean it took up almost the entire episode. Is that. Is that it?

C (53:58)

Did it? Did we. We're almost at time, but see if you can shoehorn eight good minutes in here.

B (54:03)

Okay, well, I can. Look, I can shoehorn eight minutes in. I can't shoehorn good minutes. And I can't make bricks without straw. I mean, I am not I am not the children of Israel in, in Egypt, you know, building bricks for the, for the pyramids. So this experience in Iowa makes the Latter Day Saints even more concerned about the chicanery of the government. And it's in its anti Mormon bent, the fact that they may not do what they are told. Now the person asking this question about Brigham Young saying that someone was dead and in hell, they this wasn't a reference to James Polk, but James Polk is the president. As we talked about last time during the Mexican War and by the time the Saints got to Salt Lake, Brigham Young had already discerned through various means that even though Polk kept saying he was a friend of the Latter Day Saints, he wasn't. When they first got there, okay, there are a couple days there, they go explore things. They actually go find some hot springs and take a little, little bath, you know, go up Ensign Peak. They have a Sunday, their first sabbath day there, July 25th. And they have like hours and hours and hours of preaching. You think, wow, maybe. And boy do they, when we talk about industry, they have just gone up and over the Rocky mountains after traveling 1500 miles. First day after the Sabbath, what are they doing? Plowing the ground and planting corn. So they immediately, not on the Sabbath, but immediately after the Sabbath, begin preparing the land for the people to come after them. And that night Brigham Young gives a sermon. And part of it's really interesting because he explains how the city's supposed to be laid out. And then he continued in his address. Now this is to only this advanced party of pioneers. No one else is there yet. It's just this hundred plus people that made it there with Brigham Young's company. In this early pioneer company, President Young in his address to the Saints remarked that he was determined to have all things in righteousness, order in all things in righteousness should be practiced in this land. That we had come here according to the direction and counsel of Brother Joseph Smith before his death. Remember that was a big deal for Brigham Young. Joseph said we needed to go get out of the country. And all the other break off apostate groups said, no, we don't. And Brigham said, we do what Joseph says we don't do. We don't do what we want to do. We do whatever. Joseph revealed it was the council of Brother Joseph Smith before his death. And that is definitively provable that he would still have been alive if the 12 had been in Nauvoo when he recrossed the river from Montrose to Nauvoo.

C (57:19)

Oh.

B (57:22)

Wow. Why is that I think it's because they would have prevented him from coming back, that he was persuaded to come back by residents of Nauvoo. But the 12 would have said, nope, you go save yourself. He spoke of the Saints being driven from place to place. He said, the only way. Boggs, Clark, Lucas and Benton. So that's Lilburn. Boggs, Clark and Lucas are two of the Missouri generals that severely persecute the Saints during the extermination. And Thomas Hart Benton, who is the. He's the senator from Missouri who's incredibly powerful in the Senate. He almost single handedly prevents any discussion of any remuneration or intervention for the Saints in the Congress because he's the senator from Missouri. And all the leaders of the mob, they could have been saved in the day of the Lord if they would have come forward and voluntarily allowed their heads to be cut off and their blood to run upon the ground. I think, I think he's, he's being rhetorical here in the sense.

C (58:26)

Oh, okay. He's saying using imagery. Yes.

B (58:29)

Yeah. Which no one ever does in any speak speeches today. It's very funny. When we read rhetoric from the past, we take it literally. And then we say, oh, my goodness, I can't believe that he said that. And then when we read rhetoric today, we say, well, that's just figurative and we don't have to read it.

C (58:49)

Like, right.

B (58:50)

I'll text Richard like, dude, I'm starving. I'm so hungry I could eat a horse. And Richard doesn't like immediately search for where horse meat is served in the United States and say, look, it looks like we're gonna have to take a trip to France.

C (59:09)

Actually, I think they might have it at the, at the Costco off 2100. That's. They've got a world's largest. It's the world's largest Costco. If anyone's got a horse meat, it's got to be that Costco.

B (59:20)

But clearly, you know, there's a lot of things that are said in rhetorically that, that our great, great grandkids will think are very weird.

C (59:29)

I mean, I just said one about that Costco having horse meat.

B (59:32)

Yeah, well, well, well. Even the casual way that we say things like, man, I was so mad I could kill him. Really? Like, so you were going to kill your son because he wrecked the car? Obviously I wasn't going to kill my son because he wrecked the car. It was over the top rhetoric to express how angry you were. Right. Well, so he goes on to say that all the Governors and presidents of the United States had rejected our petitions from the first to the last. That when the Saints were driven from Illinois to perish, as it were, on the prairies, then President Polk sends for a draft of 600 men to go into the army. What for? That they might be wasted away? That we might be. And then the page of Wilford Woodruff's journal is torn there, so you can't quite see what he said. That we might be entirely wasted as a people if the brethren are not gone. They would have made war upon us, and the governor of Missouri would have been ordered not to let us cross the Missouri. And the raising of the battalion was for our temporal salvation of the time. Brigham said Polk would be damned for this act and that he, with many of the government men, had a hand in the death of Joseph and Hyrum and that they should be damned for these things. And if they ever sent any men to interfere with us here, they should have their throats cut and sent to hell. So he's. He's. Again, the rhetoric is. You can, you can sense how upset that they are. So already by 1847, Brigham, he doesn't know exactly what's going on with Polk, but he has discerned that Polk was lying. And he was. And we spent the entire time. Go listen to our podcast on the Mormon Battalion calling, and you'll learn Polk is just lying through his teeth about everything. So Brigham doesn't know yet because he doesn't have Polk's journals what he was lying about, but he has discerned that Polk was lying to them about what was going on. Now, why does that matter? Well, because as the war ends, Polk is still the president. So the Saints immediately send to their friend Thomas Kane, who's not a member of the church, he's one of the people that helped raise the Mormon Battalion. A petition to become a state or a territory. Well, Polk, Thomas Kane is a Democrat. Polk is a Democrat. Kane had been sent out by Polk to help, you know, keep the Mormons on the right side and to raise the Mormon Battalion. So Cain goes and meets with. With Polk to find out, you know, what are the odds in this is in 1849. So a couple years after, sorry, Cain meets with. With Polk in 1847 and 1848 and to find out what are the. What are the prospects of us becoming a territory with having our own leaders. So this is what he gets back from Cain. And this is sent to Wilford Woodruff in a letter. So why didn't he appeal for the territorial government. I applied according to the wish of President Young for a territorial government. I had my last sad, painful interview with President Poll and I found that he did not feel disposed to favor your people and had his men of his own stamp picked out to serve as governor and all of the officers, and they would have oppressed you or injured you in any way to fill their own pockets. He would not appoint men from among yourselves. So this is Thomas Kane saying, I learned from Polk that if we went forward with the territorial organization that he wasn't going to appoint any Latter Day Saints to be part of the territorial government, even though only Latter Day Saints lived in that area.

C (63:53)

So I know we're out of time, so me asking this question only takes you off, but is it just general bigotry from a religious standpoint? Is it the anti patriot sentiment that's there? What is it that makes Polk hate the Latter Day Saints so much?

B (64:11)

So, first of all, everyone hates Mormons. So the standing, the, the standing, you know, baseline is I don't like Mormons. That's American culture. Look, you, you can tell from that Pew research study, that's American culture now.

C (64:28)

Yeah, yeah.

B (64:29)

You actually can't find a lot of people who have personally had horrible interactions with multiple members of the church that would make them say, I hate Mormons. I mean, I've had horrible interactions with evangelical Christians and Catholics and I don't go, yep, that's it. Every Catholic's a horrible person. I have the ability to discern the difference between the two. Right. But for Polk, I think it's primarily this idea that Mormons aren't true Americans. They aren't patriotic. Even though they sent so many men to go fight in the war, they aren't good Christians. Now Polk isn't super religious himself, but he knows that Protestant Christianity is a sinew binding peoples together. So I know the Mormons have been rabble rousers in the past. I know they were leaving the country because they were mad at the country. I'm certainly not going to appoint any of their people to decide what the laws should be in this place where they're at 1500 miles away from any other civilization. Yeah, I'm going to appoint my own people, who by the way, I want to appoint anyway because then they give me political gravitas. So I get, I dole out favors which benefits me politically. It doesn't benefit me politically at all to dole out a favor to a Mormon. Oh no. If I don't give something to W.W. phelps, might write a hymn about me. I mean, what, what difference does that make to me? So Cain explains that he didn't actually submit the territorial request because he talked with Polk and Polk told him, yeah, I'm not going to have any Mormons. I'm not going to appoint a Mormon governor or Mormon judges. He would not appoint men from among yourselves. And I saw it absolutely necessary that you should have officers of your own people to govern you or you were better off without any government. I had to use my own discernment and I withdrew the petition. And I'm fully decided upon the point that you must have officers of yourselves and not military politicians who are strutting around in your midst usurping authority over you. Now this is a very key point of this letter. Now look, they respect Thomas Kane more than anything because they finally found one honest man in the government. So this is a very important point for Latter Day Saint history. Cain tells them, it will not do for you to take the slavery question or the anti slavery or any other side but neutral. Now Thomas Kane is himself a fervent abolitionist. He is not only someone who's a free soil Democrat, he is actually going to have lots of connections with the Liberty Party because he wants slavery to end. His advice that the Latter Day Saints need to not say anything about slavery is taken very much to heart by the Latter Day Saint leadership that if they want to ever become a territory or a state, they're going to not be pro slavery, not be anti slavery, which offends our sensibilities today because we say no. I wanted them to be outspoken opponents of slavery. Well, their most trusted friend they have outside of the church who has all kinds of political connections. I mean his dad's best friend is the Vice President of the United States, for crying out loud, is uni to not say anything about slavery. And they take that to heart. Now obviously that doesn't mean that there weren't some, you know, 19th century Americans all have some degree of racism and incorrect beliefs compared to what we would believe today. But it's part of the reason why this is going to become a pretty muted issue because they're told if you ever want to become a state or territory, you won't talk about this at all. And they're told that by someone who has dedicated his life to the opposition of slavery. So, so that kind of shows you how serious it is if someone like Thomas Kane is saying, don't you talk about slavery at all when all Thomas Kane does is talk about slavery. That kind of gives you an import of just how, how, how serious this is.

C (69:02)

Well, I would say politically, though, I mean, that makes a lot of sense, right? You've got people that are for it and again it. And look, just be milk toast and.

B (69:10)

You'Ll get more for them. The most important thing was, was having a state government because then a governor can't order your extermination. So, so everything is on a sliding scale. Oh, it'd be great if we had X and we had Y and we had Z. What we need most, the whole reason we left the country is to be able to govern ourselves. Well, we don't have the ability to govern ourselves until we have a state government. And that's why that state government is seen as so important. And you know, a territorial government where there's only appointees from the outside, well, how is that any different than living in Illinois where the governor who's elected is elected by people who hate you. You're not going to be treated fairly even though you're the majority population. So this, in this information that they get about Polk. So first of all, I share this because Polk did say, Brigham Young did say in this, in this sermon that Polk was going to be damned for what he did. So I mean, maybe you can take that as being in hell, right? But this is not the damned and in hell that our, our several inquiries were referring to a different one on the fifth episode. I'm going to tell you. Hopefully this is fascinating not just for the political jargon, but also for the fact that, I mean, we, we got to reference things like, like the gospel topics essays. So thank you so much for joining us. We will, we'll try to do better. We won't, but we'll.

C (70:59)

I do think it's fun. I do think it's fun though, that we've got multiple presidents where Brigham's like.

B (71:04)

Look, okay, yeah, this one say, what president did Brigham Young say was damned? All of them. I'm like, oh, well, what. I know what source you. You are referring to, but I've got to give you the whole deal, right? I've got the complete package of, oh, I'm so glad that Brigham Young never condemned James Polk. Right. So you kind of need to know. Anyway, we'll talk more about this in our next episode where we'll talk about the incident that they're actually talking to. I think depending on whether or not we do, we just need to cut out Christie's corner. If the people want this, they have to also not want to look good in Sunday school.

C (71:51)

It's fair.

B (71:52)

Okay. All right. Thanks so much for joining us.

A (71:58)

Thank you for listening to the Standard of Truth podcast, hosted by historian Dr. Garrett Dirkmont and Dr. Richard Leduc. If you know of anybody that could benefit from the material in this episode, please share it with them. Until next time.