S6E2 President Holland and Avoiding Deception

Summary

Standard of Truth – S6E2: President Holland and Avoiding Deception
Release Date: January 8, 2026
Hosts: Dr. Gerrit Dirkmaat & Dr. Richard Leduc

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Dr. Gerrit Dirkmaat and Dr. Richard Leduc reflect on the passing and legacy of President Jeffrey R. Holland, sharing personal stories and the impact of his teachings. They address current issues facing Church members, particularly how to recognize and avoid deception—highlighted by a recent misleading email purporting to be from the Church. The hosts use both humor and scholarship to emphasize the importance of discerning trustworthy sources in matters of faith and history, and they also take time to share lighter moments, like the now-legendary "Yoohoo experiments."

---

Remembering President Holland (03:23–19:55)

Personal Reflections & Lasting Impact

• Tributes & Grief: Dirkmaat expresses difficulty with the loss:

  “It’s a tough thing when apostles that really helped shape your testimony as a young man, when they pass away.” (03:27 – B)

• Two Encounters with President Holland:

  • As a young man, Dirkmaat was “blown away by his teaching abilities and his directness and his doctrine.”
  • Later, while working on the Joseph Smith Papers, he witnessed Elder (then President) Holland’s involvement in reviewing historical material.

• Stories of Humor: Dirkmaat recounts being mistaken for “Pastor Derek” during a tour in Israel, receiving an “honorary doctorate of divinity” from a British evangelical tour guide.

  “He assumed we were a Christian group… started calling me Pastor Derek… that’s not correct.” (07:18 – B)
  (Leads to playful banter about “Pastor Derek” as a “youth pastor name.”)

• A Memorable Exchange: When reviewing sections of the Joseph Smith Papers extensively referencing Dr. Philastus Hurlbut, Holland wrote,

  “I have had just about enough of this Dr. Philastus Hurlbut. This miserable little creature did so much to Joseph Smith.” (11:45 – B)
  Dirkmaat interprets this as stemming from Holland’s deep testimony and frustration at Joseph’s detractors.

• President Holland’s Final Message to Faculty:

  “If you knew what I know, you would run—you would run from house to house, from assignment to assignment, trying to do everything you could to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ… If we truly understood the importance of the gospel, we would never be weary in well doing.” (13:15 – B)
  This statement, delivered as Holland’s health failed, deeply impressed and spiritually moved the listeners.

The Power of Influential Talks (15:11–19:24)

• Leduc’s Story: Cites Holland’s April 2001 talk about Elder and Sister Hess, Idaho farmers who, as missionaries, increased Belarusian potato yields elevenfold through service—a talk so meaningful that it motivated Leduc’s academic path and his desire to inspire others similarly.

• The Tone of Testimony:

  “If you have the right tone, you can say just about anything.” (19:24 – C)

• Carthage Reflection:
  Dirkmaat recalls Holland’s style of bearing testimony:

  “The proof they were not deceivers is that they were reading the very book they would have been lying about when they get murdered.” (19:38 – B)

---

Avoiding Deception in Church Communications (21:12–45:52)

Listener Email: Detecting a Fake “Church Email” (21:12–40:43)

• The Setup:
  Kevin, a listener, describes an email he received that imitated Church communication—complete with a “weathered” logo and formal language—purporting to announce new programs while actually lacing in faith-undermining misinformation.

• Host Reactions:

  • Dirkmaat:

    “If the email is not from the church, you should very easily know that everything else that’s in it is a deliberate, manipulative attempt to deceive… Why, if someone’s argument is good, would they have to lie to make it?” (28:50 – B)

  • The hosts make light of the unconvincing graphics (ex: “ran out of magenta ink,” 27:12–C), but pivot to the seriousness of misinformation and its intent.

• Specific Debunking:
  Dirkmaat addresses common tactics in deceptive communications:

  • Misrepresentation of sources (i.e., claiming the Gospel Topics essays say things they do not)
  • Presenting false claims as doctrinal changes (e.g., decanonizing the Book of Abraham)
  • Use of fraudulent “official” addresses and sender information

  “If you are lying to make your point, then you have no moral high ground. You can have a different opinion all you want... If you are asserting as fact things that are not facts, then you are a liar and a reprobate.” (33:40 – B)

• Avoiding Such Sources:

  “Once you know they’re willing to lie about one thing, for all you know, the other things that you don’t know, all the background on, they’re willing to lie about that.” (36:39 – B)

• Practical Advice:

  • Guard your testimony and avoid “anti-Mormon garbage.”
  • If a source argues against the living prophet or Church, “that’s when it’s time to end the conversation.” (35:50 – B)
  • Rely on official Church communication and trusted spiritual sources.

The Challenge of Growing Deceptions (40:43–45:52)

• Leduc’s Perspective:

  “These things are only going to become more difficult to distinguish... With AI and other things… There are going to be more and more of these things, further and harder to distinguish the difference.” (40:43 – C)

• Dirkmaat’s Affirmation:

  “Build a brick wall between you and anyone arguing against the current prophet and the current church’s teachings… prioritize your testimony.” (41:22 – B)

• Conclusion:
  Do not indulge, dabble, or give attention to deceptive or antagonistic sources—no matter the apparent intent or personal connection.

---

Lighter Moments: The Yoohoo Experiments (46:03–53:18)

• Listener Experimentation: Sheila, a dedicated listener, details her scientific experiments in Fairbanks, Alaska to see if Yoohoo (the chocolate beverage) will freeze in extreme cold.

• Findings:

  • At 0°F, Yoohoo remained liquid for hours; only at –20°F did it freeze into what she called “an ugly brown block.”
  • Boiling Yoohoo thrown into the air at –10°F did not freeze (“fell to the ground unharmed and unfrozen”), unlike boiling water.
  • Sheila confirms the hosts’ longstanding Yoohoo skepticism: “It was terrible. Who drinks this?” (48:39 – C), and draws laughs by asserting, “You wouldn’t serve that to prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.” (51:21 – C)

• Hosts Respond:

  • Applause and laughter; Dirkmaat suggests, tongue-in-cheek, that Yoohoo could double as antifreeze.
  • Jokingly threaten to change the podcast logo to “Joseph drinking a Yoohoo” if the company ever sponsors them (49:07 – B).

---

Mailbag / Listener Question: Church Succession (53:45–73:44)

The Succession Crisis & “Missouri” Variations

• Missionary Listener’s Question:
  An elder from Missouri (noting the “Missoura” pronunciation) asks about a friend’s claim that Joseph Smith III was the rightful successor to Joseph Smith, based largely on disputed historical testimonies.

• Host Response – Debunking Forgeries and Claims:

  • Dirkmaat points out that the “Thomas Bullock journal entry” cited is a known Mark Hofmann forgery (57:29–58:30 – B).
  • The Temple Lot testimony, especially from witness James Whitehead, is problematic due to contradictory statements about fundamental doctrines (e.g., denial of plural marriage that he previously affirmed).
  • Clarifies that the reliable determinant of succession is not isolated, disputed historical claims, but the doctrine and ordinances Joseph Smith taught and prioritized—especially baptisms for the dead and temple work, which were central in Nauvoo.

  “If you are looking for a church that continues to teach the things that Joseph was teaching all throughout his life… you don’t go very far before you realize that… they are not being taught or accepted by the various other restoration branches.” (61:00 – B)

• Succession by Teachings and Priesthood Keys:

  • The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints alone has continuously practiced temple work as taught by Joseph Smith.
  • Other branches have “sliding scales” of belief and doctrine, but do not maintain temple ordinances Joseph instituted.

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• “He obviously was fine with what we’d written. He was just expressing frustration. And I think that’s because he has such a… deep, powerful testimony of the prophet Joseph Smith.” (12:24 – B)
• “If we truly understood the importance of the gospel, we would never be weary in well doing. We would run.” (14:13 – B quoting President Holland)
• “You don’t get to claim that you have a testimony of the restoration at the same time you are talking about how the current church is in error.” (43:00 – B)
• “No one believes what we believe. That’s fine. That’s why we send out missionaries.” (34:24 – B)
• “I was expecting something like a B grade Nestle’s chocolate milk, but no… more like an F. F grade chocolate water.” (48:50 – C reading from Sheila)
• “If a source argues against the living prophet, that’s when it’s time to end the conversation.” (35:50 – B)
• “If you have an argument that is a good one, you don't need to lie to make it. So why are you lying to make it?” (39:30 – B)

---

Key Timestamps

• 03:23 – Reflections on President Holland’s passing
• 07:18 – “Pastor Derek” story
• 09:06 – Lunch with President Holland, box lunch anecdote
• 13:15 – President Holland's final, powerful message to faculty
• 15:11–19:24 – Influential talks: The potato farmers in Belarus & tone in teaching
• 21:12–40:43 – The fake Church email: Dissection and advice on avoiding deception
• 46:03–53:18 – Sheila’s Yoohoo experiments and comedic highlights
• 53:45–73:44 – The succession question: Joseph Smith III, Mark Hofmann forgery, and evidence of priesthood continuity

---

Tone and Style

The hosts balance academic rigor with playful humor, offering both warmth and direct counsel. Their faith-based approach emphasizes trust in prophetic leadership and careful discernment against deliberate misinformation, while encouraging listeners to find joy and camaraderie in the gospel journey.

---

This episode encourages listeners to remember faithful leaders like President Holland, scrutinize sources for deception, trust in established Church leadership, and—when in doubt—be wary of both dubious doctrine and chocolate drinks that resist freezing.

Transcript

[A]

Welcome to the Standard of Truth podcast. In this podcast, Dr. Garrett Dirkmaat and Dr. Richard Leduc explore the early history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and the life and teachings of the prophet Joseph Smith. They examine the original historical sources and provide context for events of the past. They approach the history of the church with faith, expertise and humor.

[B]

Hi, welcome to another episode of the Standard of Truth podcast. I'm your host, Dr. Garrett Dirkmont, and I'm feeling very under the weather. We should have just canceled doing an episode, but I'm joined by my usurper who was waiting for just the moment. As soon as I told him my throat wouldn't work. Oh, he said, well, you know, I could just do the whole show.

[C]

I've got 20 minutes on reciprocity. I've got another 20 minutes on prospect Theory. I could just go, oh my gosh.

[B]

Well, I'm joined by my friend Richard leduc and I do apologize that I. For multiple times during the show as I try to breathe and or talk, I will probably start falling into an NPR whisper voice where. Thank you so much for joining us on npr. Notice I could talk like this all day. There's a certain sense to the timbre and the whisper that it works.

[C]

Hello, Garrett. Thanks for having me back. Really excited to be here. I haven't seen you for several weeks. I am legitimately excited to see you.

[B]

It was that kind of a bender.

[C]

You just came back from Israel. It's very exciting and so no international incidents while you were there. So we're happy about that.

[B]

That they found out about.

[C]

That they found out about. It's nice to have you back. So, Garrett, there's so many things to talk about. We have 400 million emails that we will have read but will not cover here.

[B]

We're very sorry to everyone. We read all the emails. We really do. We just can't read all of them.

[C]

On the air ever.

[B]

Ever.

[C]

But so dead in hell. 11. Garrett, take it away.

[B]

No, we put that to bed.

[C]

Okay.

[B]

We decided that we're no longer going to talk about anything related to Utah history.

[C]

Nothing for your dissertation at least.

[B]

Yeah. We have to steer clear. In fact, if anything's in my dissertation, we have to just say, yeah, that's, that's like season 38 material, even if it's not unplugging me.

[C]

Yes, but. So there were a couple of things that, that we wanted to cover and to talk about. And I think one of the things that you had said in our pre production meeting was just to Spend a minute on the passing of President Holland.

[B]

Oh, man. Yeah, that was really sad. Everybody, obviously, you know, tributes have poured in and President Holland where it had the funeral, I mean, so this episode is going to come out a little bit, you know, too much after the fact. But it's. It's a tough thing when apostles that really helped shape your testimony as a young man, when they pass away. And I got to have kind of two encounters with President Holland. The encounter as a young man who was just blown away by his teaching abilities and his directness and his doctrine. And then I got to encounter him working on the Joseph Smith papers, because when I was first hired, he was one of the apostles that was reviewing the. The stuff that was produced. You know, he would go through it and check it. And that reminded me of interactions that we had had. Again, I'm not important. Nobody knows who I am. If you were to ask President Holland, who's Garrett Dirkmot? He would say, who's Derek Drachmart? And that would be the response. Okay, so he doesn't know who I am. Speaking of which, while we were in Israel, if you. If you go to the Garden Tomb, the Garden Tomb is. Is operated by an evangelical Christian group. I believe it's the site where Jesus was. Was. Was buried and that it's the. The actual tomb that Jesus was in. And so when they talk to you about it, it's very much a missionary pitch, you know, telling you you're saved only by faith. We know this. For whatever reason, the pastor leading our tour assumed we were a Christian group. I don't. I mean, he didn't ask, are you from Utah? Or he would have been like, well, obviously you're not. And that apparently the Christian groups that come are always being led by a pastor. So this very, you know, erudite British pastor who's leading us on this tour, he says, oh, you know, who's your group leader? Who are you here with? And so people say, oh, we're here with Garrett. And, you know, he comes over and shakes my hand. Good to meet you. And I said, hi, I'm Garrett Dirkmont. What he heard is Derek, and proceeded to call me Derek. I know this is before my voice was gone, so that wasn't an excuse. But not only that, he gave me an honorary doctrine of divinity. He assumed that we were a Christian group. And I mean, traditional Christians, obviously, we're all Christians, but they don't think we are, and started calling me Astor Derek. And he called me Pastor Derek the.

[C]

Entire time the tour had to love that, by the way.

[B]

Every single person. Because, you know, he's speaking on this, like, mic headsets, you know, so everyone's listening as they're walking around. People were just laughing the whole time. He's trying to give this tour of what they believe to be this sacred spot where the crucifixion and the resurrection took place. But he keeps talking to me about, you know, in a nice English accent, you know, that he's. Sure Pastor Derek has talked to you before about what it was like when the women came to the tomb and Jesus wasn't there. But people are having a hard time taking it seriously because, A, he keeps calling me Derek, B, he thinks I'm a pastor. Both of which are not correct. And, yeah, they vary much. But I thought, you know what? That's a kind brother in Christ. Someone who will immediately assume that you have a doctorate of divinity and that you're a pastor of a Christian congregation, when, in fact, you just have a Dutch name that's hard to pronounce.

[C]

That's pretty funny. Pastor Derek. Pastor Derek's more of a youth pastor name.

[B]

It really does sound like that. Yeah. And maybe that's why he was treating me the way he was. Okay.

[C]

Yeah, you're not going to be on the main stage for sure. Yeah, you're going to be. You're going to have a guitar.

[B]

Fire tricks and stuff.

[C]

Yeah, you're going to. You're going to play a guitar. Yeah, you're going to. You're going to be singing some songs around the campfire, and you may get to a Bible story every now and then, but. Yeah. President. President.

[B]

Well, so what I was going to say is, you know, he doesn't know my name at all. Right. So I don't want to be one of those people when, you know, an apostle passes away to be like. To try to, you know, act like I had some kind of great personal relationship. Right. I don't. I am nothing. No one knows who I am, nor should they. So it's not even like a statement of why don't. I'm well aware why they don't. But early on during the papers project, we got to have a lunch meeting with him. And so it's just me and a few other historians and at the time, Elder Hoen, but, you know, President Holland. And we're all awestruck because, you know, it's this. This is as Elder Holland, the person who's been such a big deal to us. So we go in there. The whole point is we Were going to have a discussion about some difficult topics related to producing the Joseph in the papers. We all sit down, we have our little box lunches in front of us, and everyone's. Not one person touches their lunch. They're all just sitting there. Elder Holland's like, so what? You know, what questions do you have? Everyone's just silent. No one's touching their lunch. He just tears into his box lunch and start going to town. Just starts. Starts eating it, you know. Man, you guys aren't gonna eat? I'm hungry. I don't have time for this. I've got to eat. We eventually had, you know, a really good discussion. But the thing I remember most was he was one of the people reviewing one of the volumes that I worked on that had a lot of Dr. Falasis Hurlbut in it. And look, to tell the story, you have to talk about the guy a lot. And all the things he did to Joseph, threatening to murder him, all the lies that he told, all, you know, the court case against him. There's a lot in, you know, volume three of the Joseph Smith papers that is related to Thalassus Hurlbut, because he was doing a lot to Joseph. And apparently we found the limit to how much Elder Holland wanted to hear about philosophers, because in his review, he wrote back on one of our last cases surrounding him, last documents, he said, I have had just about enough of this Dr. Falasis Hurlbut. And then he said, you know, this miserable little creature did so much to Joseph Smith. I mean, he was. He obviously was fine with what we'd written. He was just expressing frustration. And I think that's because he has such a. He had such a deep, powerful testimony of the prophet Joseph Smith that someone who was so deliberately being deceitful, claiming that the Book of Mormon, you know, came from Solomon Spalding's manuscript, for crying out loud. It was frustrating to him. So I loved his talks. I loved him as a leader. It was really sad. I will say one last thing, that he had come and talked to our faculty just not very many months ago, and he hadn't been scheduled to speak. It was an anniversary, and he was there. And they asked him if he'd say a few words. And so he did. And here he is, you know, pretty enfeebled. He's, you know, having a harder time. And his voice still sounded better than mine does right now. But he said, if you knew what I know, you would run. You would run from house to house, from assignment to assignment, trying to do everything you could to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ. And I'm telling you, when he said that there was a spirit in that room where everybody knew exactly what he meant when he said it. That as he was approaching the end of his life, if we had the testimony that he had, he wasn't indicting us. I mean, he kept telling us what a great job we were doing and trying to spread the message of the gospel through both teaching and through research. But the point of his message was that if we truly understood the importance of the gospel, we would never be weary in well doing. We would just. We would run, as he said, we would run from house to house, from event to event, proclaiming the good news. I thought that was a special thing to hear from him the last time.

[C]

There's a talk that he gave back In April of 2001, four years before President Hinckley's infamous talk on gambling, which we well know. Which we well know and follow. But. So it's a funny thing. There are few things in my life that have had greater impact than this talk, which is kind of a. Kind of a crazy thing. But I remember he was. He was giving a talk, and it was about Elder and Sister Hess from Ashton, Idaho. And they got called on a mission out to. At the time, it was. It was the. It was to Belarus, but it was in the Lithuania Vilnius mission, and they were old potato farmers and they got called out to Belarus, and the people were not. I think the entire talk was about senior missionaries, by the way. I think that was the. That was the call for senior missionaries to go serve. But so they go out there and the Belarusian people are hard people, and they have had a hard experience, especially during the time when these people were serving. And rather than going and preaching the gospel, they kind of just rolled up their sleeves and helped show them how to increase potato yields, which they did by 11 times. Wow. And when. Right, I know, right? So, first of all, as an Idaho boy, I'm. I'm like, hey, that's. That's pretty good.

[B]

I remember this talk as well, thinking.

[C]

That, oh, yeah, it was incredibly powerful. Um, and that when essentially the. The idea. First of all, Brother Hess talking about, you know, the miracle of it, and, you know, sometimes the Lord just needs a. An old potato farmer.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

But that when they were able to go and just to serve the people, that the people put down the defenses and were more willing to listen to the Lord. And it's. It's a. It's a kind of a silly Thing. But one of the main reasons why I went back to get my PhD was because of this talk from 2001 and the desire that I had when I retire to become a potato farmer. Well, oh, so, no.

[B]

Okay.

[C]

So I, you know, I teach entrepreneurship and, and sales, business development stuff. But to take, to take that lecture that I developed for the University of Utah, you know, entrepreneurship students, and to take it all over the place in hopes that by teaching people how to better increase revenues to their business all over the world. Right. That, that, that will hopefully bring down people's defenses. Those are the kinds of missions that I would love to serve. And, and, and whether or not that I could ever even do that is. Who knows? But that has been a talk that has been a guiding light for me my entire life. Now, obviously, President Holland was an incredible speaker, incredible man. Every time that he would speak in general conference, my wife would say, all right, everyone be quiet. We want to listen to this. You know, and it was always just so great. But honestly, there were a couple of talks. President Faust has one about when he was a, when he was a kid and pretending to be asleep. I still am like, oh, my gosh.

[B]

Pretending to be asleep was.

[C]

Grandmother goes and gets the wood. But this talk has been so impactful to me and President Holland. What an incredible legacy of service and what incredible advice to you. If you have the right tone, you can say just about anything.

[B]

Yeah. Yep. Yep, I remember that advice. And then he, I mean, his testimony of Joseph Smith, I mean, so powerful. They played at Carthage jail today with.

[C]

The Book of Mormon, where he's holding it up. Yeah.

[B]

Yep. That, that, you know, the proof that they were not deceivers is that they were reading the very book that they would have been lying about when they get murdered.

[C]

He would not do that.

[B]

Yep. He would not. Yep. Yeah, I, I, I miss him, and I know that a lot of our listeners do. So I'm sure it's wonderful that he's reunited with his wife and hopefully to carry on the legacy. I don't know that I pretty sure he doesn't consider me running from house to house, but I'm doing my best.

[C]

Yeah. Well, anyway, thank you for those stories, Garrett. That was very, very nice. We do have Phoebe Draper Palmer Brown mailbag as we are starting in. Come follow me in the Old Testament. We are several millennia away from your expertise, but we're inching forward every week closer and closer, from the creation of the world to the 19th century, and we're very excited about it.

[B]

And I like the fact that we'll just. You know, we'll just pretend that I somehow have an expertise in something that I don't. That we've already been doing that, and now we get to really demonstrate it.

[C]

Well, Pastor Derek, I'm excited about it.

[B]

I do have a doctorate of divinity now.

[C]

All right, let me pull up the old. The old email here. This first email comes to us from Kevin. Dear Doctors Leduc and Dirkmont, greetings from Washington State. I've been an avid litner for a couple of years and love sharing your podcast with family and friends. I am not dedicated enough to pay for premium content yet, but there is room for growth.

[B]

Man, why are we even reading this?

[C]

That's a great point. This is a great point. It is funny that as I listen to your podcast, I feel like I am spending time with old friends. That actually kind of is. That's our hope, Right?

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

Of this. This whole thing.

[B]

Although now your old friend has apparently got, you know, some kind of growth in his throat, and that's why I sound like. Like I was just punched right in the throat. That's what it sounds like.

[C]

He's never sounded better. Garrett. The time spent recalling old inside jokes, quoting movies and TV shows makes me feel like we have known each other for years. I have to explain to people when I recommend the podcast, they need to go back and start. Go back to the starter. They will not get the jokes. My bishop recently asked me who Christy is and what her corner is all about. Well, now, out of context, that could go very forward.

[B]

That's why you need to pay attention to what the point is.

[C]

Christie's Corner, in a different context. Something completely different. Your show has been informative and engaging. It keeps me awake when I drive, which is amazing because I am very sleepy driver. I laugh, cry, think, and feel the spirit. So why right now? Well, I am serving in a bishopric right now, and I got an email today that was disguised as a church email, but was really a message designed to undermine faith and get me to teach. Teach it as a new program. I act. Acts like it's what the church wants new members to know as well as everyone else. I will attach a copy of the email at the end of the message. This will spike the dandometer for sure.

[B]

I thought it was dander meter or it goes back.

[C]

Well, we lost. We lost the trademark on dandometer or dander meter, and so we had to go with dandometer. Otherwise we can't capitalize on it. So.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

Yeah. Lots of T shirts in the end. Thank you to the Standard Truth podcast because I was able to see this for what it was. Most of what this email claims has directly been addressed by you. Whatever has not been fail falls into categories of poor sources and arguments that I do not need to spend time refuting. Increasingly they give some things the brotherhood have actually spoken about and then shift you to topics that and claims not made by the church. I'm so thankful for your willingness to talk about challenging subjects openly so that I can turn the page on this and not be kept up worrying about the things that conspiring men would have me worry about. Thank you so much. If you are ever in my neck of the woods, I would love to take you to dinner. Kevin, now that you get a good seafood dinner in Washington now it depends where he's at. If he's in Tri Cities, there's many good potato dishes. You can get a good Yukon potato, perhaps a golden all kinds.

[B]

I feel like there's been a lot of potato talk on this podcast already.

[C]

If we have I have I met my cabinet.

[B]

Yeah. I feel like this is exactly how your former bishop felt about my mentions of atheists in my sacrament meeting talk.

[C]

Yeah. When you mentioned them all the time. You've spoken our word a couple times.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

Yeah. I think when we had a presiding 70 that you mentioned that probably was the thing that made him nervous.

[B]

That was probably the number one thing.

[C]

Yeah, probably one.

[B]

Well, so a lot of people got this. Yes, a lot of people got this. I didn't, but we had dozens of listeners who not only got it but then emailed to say, hey, what's up with this? So I think we're going to talk about it. We're not going to go through every point, but I just want to talk about the fact that I love how Kevin brought up that, you know, part of. First of all, we covered a lot of these topics on the show, but hopefully what also is going on is a changing way that you think about things like this that are just presented as truth. Right. That we understand that we don't just take them exactly how they appear and where things come from matters. The email, you know, it has like a weird like image of Jesus. You know, like it was trying to replicate the church's imagery and you know, just church wide program informed consent. Dear brothers and sisters, today we have an opportunity of spiritual importance. Of spiritual importance and for thoughtful reflection we've all been participate invited to participate in a new initiative. Like so first of all, this email isn't coming from the Church, which anyone can tell just by the fact that that, that's, that's not coming from the church's email address. So.

[C]

But first of all, I would like to say, like, the image of Jesus is like, like you said, it's, it's like an image. It's like the, the, the general, you know, logo for the, for the church. But when we were in fourth grade and there were budget cuts on the printer.

[B]

Yeah. And it only had a yellow part.

[C]

And it was the copy of. The copy of. The copy of the copy they ran out of, of all of the other colors. And it is super weathered. So. Yeah, that's a, that's a, that's a.

[B]

Big old yellow light. Yeah. I mean, so you get anything in an email that's claiming to be from the church, the first thing you can do is see whether or not the email is from the church. So that's, that's point one.

[C]

These are good points. Point one is on track.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

Okay.

[B]

Is the email from the church. Okay. The moment you realize it's not, you should very easily know that everything else that's in it is a deliberate, manipulative attempt to deceive. Now, why do I say deliberate and manipulative? The fact that it was trying to make itself seem like it was from the church means what? Means its authors were trying to be deceived. And you have to immediately ask yourself, why, if someone's argument is good, would they have to lie to make it?

[C]

It's a good question, but I just want to confirm one thing. You're saying that nine numbers.mailchimpapp.com is not the church's email.

[B]

It's not their current email address. Okay.

[C]

Okay.

[B]

Yeah, but you know, this even, you know, just little things that are just, you know, they're trying to entice people by saying, oh, the gospel topics essays and then providing links to them to try to essentially reel people in with the fact that, oh, this stuff is from the church. Videos of President Nelson showing us how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon with his face in a white stove pipe hat. Look, this is only history nerd stuff speaking. But stovepipe hats hadn't been invented yet, so the hat was not a stovepipe hat. Now, unsurprisingly, the person. Wow, that's funny. The image of the logo of the church on their dot matrix printer without ink didn't also know that there's a difference between a stovepipe hat and the common hat. A top hat that's worn a top hat and a stovepipe hat aren't the same thing. But hey, who's counting in made up fraudulent email land? It goes forever. We're not going to go through all of it, but the point is to make it seem like the church is saying these things and to sow the seeds of doubt. Right. For instance, we're about to study the Book of Abraham. The Book of Abraham has been the subject of deep scholarly study which has found that it is not what Joseph claimed it to be. The Gospel topics essay explains that we have the papyrus that it was translated from. That is false. The Gospel topics essay says we don't have most of the papyrus. So there's a quick checkup for you there. The translation is 100% incorrect. Okay. That is also not in the Gospel topics essay.

[C]

That seems like that would really be a major announcement in the Gospel topics essay. We're keeping it in the pearl of great price. But it's all incorrect.

[B]

Yep, yep. It's things like that. All throughout the brethren are prayerfully considering decanonizing the Book of Abraham.

[C]

Well, if it's 100% incorrect, I would think that they would be thinking about that.

[B]

I mean the person who created this has no problem just lying. Just this is the type of evil doing that the people who stole the 116 pages were intending to do. If you are lying to make your point, then you have no moral high ground. You can have a different opinion all you want. You cannot believe the church is true all you want. If you are asserting as a fact things that are not facts, then you are a liar and a reprobate. And welcome to your thousand years in our primitive hell before the terrestrial resurrection. Because this is not. Well, I just believe differently than you. I believe differently from you is essentially everyone on earth. No one believes what we believe. That's fine. That's why we send out missionaries. This is not. I believe differently than you. This is. I am going to dishonestly lie about actual facts in a manipulative way to try to change people's minds through lies. Once you recognize lies like this, you should no longer give any credibility to the document. Okay. Once you find one place. Well first of all you should have no credibility to an email document that claims it's from the church. That's from mailchimp. Okay. Especially no credibility.

[C]

Especially if they don't, if they don't use the color. There's no magenta.

[B]

Yeah, it's just, I mean was out. Magenta was out. So if already you should be suspect. But let's say you didn't get it like that in an email. Let's say it's something that you, that someone showed you from someone else. When you find one deliberately incorrect or misleading thing, why would you continue to engage in that source? You know, I had someone message me, I get lots of messages. I had someone message me over the weekend because they'd watched one of these polygamy denial YouTube videos and they were really troubled by it. And in, you know, responding to them, one of the things I pointed out was multiple places where the person who created the video is deliberately deceiving, where they know that the argument they're making sounds a certain way, but they're not telling people about other sources that exist because it would hurt their argument. When people show that they're willing to be deceptive to make an argument, run, don't continue investigating with them. The end of the discussion comes when you recognize someone is willing to lie to make their point. Because once you know they're willing to lie about one thing, what does it then tell you? For all you know, the other things that you don't know, all the background on, they're willing to lie about that. And so yeah, this did get my dander meter up. Obviously spend a lot of time on plural marriage and stuff like that. This is, you know, these arguments and these statements over the top attempting and pretending to be something coming from the church is just, you know, the lowest level of anti Mormon garbage. Not even deigning it with the 360 off a half pipe that we would normally give it because it's deliberately designed to deceive. And that person no longer deserves respect because they're engaging in a lie. And they might pat themselves on the back and say, well yeah, but it's a lie for a good reason because that way it makes it so that you listen to the real gospel. Well, if you have an argument that is a good one, you don't need to lie to make it. So why are you lying to make it? If you know that there are sources that refute a position you're taking and you deliberately don't tell anyone about them, then you must not feel very confident in the position that you're taking. But you could probably know that from where the email came from. It's very lengthy. The other thing in part of this deception Church History Society is your sentence. One East South Temple, which is the Joseph Smith Memorial Building, they have better servers there. Yeah, well I checked to see, you know, Church History Society isn't there. So they even lied about that. They also said you're receiving this email because you opted in via our website, which of course nobody had. So every part of this was a deliberate dishonesty. So, yeah, unfortunately a lot of people got that. But don't be taken in by stuff like this. If someone is trying to share stuff with you, whether it's about polygamy or whether it's about the book of Abraham and it's not coming from the church, then that is your is your wake up call. If part of their narrative is here's where the current prophet is wrong, that's when it's time to end the conversation. Because that person, whatever they claim, they can claim all they want. Oh, I'm a really good member. I'm a devoted member. I just believe the prophet's wrong. Okay, well, I hate to break it to you. You're not a devoted member. You stop being a devoted member the moment you decided the prophet was wrong. That's when you stopped being a devoted member. And, and, and that's what we all make a baptismal covenant to do to follow the current prophet. So if, if we aren't going to do it, then we need to at least stop deceiving ourselves into thinking that we don't have to follow the current prophet for some reason. Well, yeah, but I really have a hard time with plural marriage. Yeah, you and everyone on earth. You aren't the only one who has a hard time with plural marriage. Every single member of the church living in America has some level of discomfort with the fact that it was practiced. But we follow what the current prophet teaches. Who is first of all teaching you not to practice plural marriage. So if you someone's telling you to, they're wrong. And second, only recently released a statement saying, Joseph Smith taught practice plural marriage. And what's frustrating is that when people imbibe some of these things, they, they start to spin out because then they stop relying on the witness of the spirit that they've had for 30, 40, 50, 60 years of their life. So these things are super frustrating to me.

[C]

Well, so, I mean, it's, I mean, I make fun of aspects of it, but when, I mean, these things are only going to become more difficult to be able to distinguish. Right. With AI and other things. I mean, when President Nelson talks about the need of having the Holy Ghost, because in coming days, we're going to need it more than ever. Like, we mock this, you know, not having the magenta ink and whatever, but like, but there are going to be more and more of these Things that are going to be further and are harder and harder to distinguish the difference.

[B]

Yeah. And you know, I would say to people to be not just wary, but build a brick wall like, like between you and anyone who is arguing against the current prophet and the current church's teachings. If you want to keep your testimony, you can't indulge in it. You can't dabble with it and think that it's not going to materially damage your spirit. You need to prioritize your testimony. Well, one way you don't prioritize it is, is by watching, reading, or listening to things that are attacking the church. And the worst part about all of these things, they claim to be using academic sources when they are making arguments that would not be accepted by academics even outside of the church. For some of the arguments, obviously, plural marriage is going to be a difficult topic, and that's why it's a bunch of this in that letter. But the, the, the plea is guard your testimony. Guard it. Satan is going to try to destroy it. And what many early members of the church learned, you are going to learn. And that is often the person who is the most at risk of damaging your testimony is someone that you personally think is a really great person. Oh, you don't understand. Bill's like an amazing guy. He totally came over and helped me when my house flooded. He just thinks that President Nelson became a false prophet when he told people, get the COVID vaccination. I mean, you know what I mean? Like, it, of course, is going to come in the guise of someone who claims that they have a testimony. But you don't get to claim that you have a testimony of the restoration. At the same time, you are talking about how the current church is in error. I will repeat it in case anyone is wondering if the church needs to change something. The angel isn't coming to you. So if you think it did, it didn't. If you think that you are the conduit whereby God is going to correct the problems in the church, you are wrong and you've been deceived. And I have no compunctions about saying that God has established a way that knowledge is given. And the way that it's given is not from a YouTube video, it's not from a fraudulent letter. It is from the prophet of God. So don't allow yourself to be deceived. Don't allow yourself to be deceived. Whether it's, you know, AI voice masquerading as President Oaks or whether it's an email or a YouTube and people are saying all the right words. I love the church so much. It just pains me so much to find out that the church was wrong about this. No, that's how you know you're being deceived. Don't allow yourself to be deceived. We have another email that, you know, has some probably unintentional deception in it, but I thought I'd talk about.

[C]

Well, so just really quick, Garrett, because we won't have time to get to it, but I. We do need to talk about. On the next episode, Sheila and her Yoo Hoo experiments in Fairbanks, Alaska.

[B]

Oh my goodness.

[C]

Next week we've got.

[B]

We should talk about it just right now.

[C]

Okay.

[B]

I mean.

[C]

All right, let me pull it up here.

[B]

It's the greatest thing that ever happened.

[C]

It really is.

[B]

As we talked about, you who and whether or not it could actually become cold enough.

[C]

I have her follow up email. So she lives in Honolulu but was holidaying in Fairbanks as people are want to do. Let me pull up her initial email here. I think we'll have links in the thing. Some of the pictures that she said, they were so great. Anyway, she did a pretty exhaustive research where she essentially took. You want me to read the. You want me to read the Holy.

[B]

Sure.

[C]

Okay. All right, let me do that. Pull it here. Let me just put it in size 48 font because I cannot see. And in case people were wondering if my vision was getting better, my understanding is with age, it just does. But as a longtime litner, I've heard a great deal of chatter over the years about Yoohoo drinks, how terrible they taste, how they won't cool with the drink. By the way, you do have experiment. I can't remember if we mentioned it here. I think we did on the podcast where there was grainy video of some Amazon driver taking.

[B]

Taking you from my porch.

[C]

Taking at Yoohoo from your porch that you left there with a trip to Alaska for Christmas and anticipated cold weather. I decided to do some Yoohoo experimentation first. After arriving in Fairbanks, I bought an eight pack of Yoohoo cartons at the grocery store since I couldn't find individual bottles even at a nearby convenience store here in Fairbanks, didn't deign to sell the drink in single cartons or bottles. And I and I did ask, apparently the consumer demand for Yoohoo, which is one of the best search engines, by the way. Yeah, if you like their watery milk, Jeeves, if you. If you like their watery milk, you're going to love their search engine. At my daughter's home. I opened one of the cartons, took a sip, and wow. You're right, it was. It was terrible. Who drinks this?

[B]

This coming from someone in Hawaii for whom Spam and eggs is amazing.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, it's a staple there.

[B]

Yeah. I actually love spamming, by the way.

[C]

I was expecting something like a B grade Nestle's chocolate milk, but no, it was more like an F. F grade chocolate water. That's what. That's what I'm saying.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

That's not good. Although if they choose to sponsor the program, I will change the things that I am saying.

[B]

We'll change our logo. It'll just be Joseph drinking a Yoo Hoo. It'll be Hiram handing him another six pack.

[C]

Sorry. Oh, my God.

[B]

We can be bought. Just. No one's buying. Promise. No one's buying.

[C]

What an enormous sellout that would. Oh, my gosh. That's.

[B]

So.

[C]

To test Garrett's assertion that Yoohoo won't chill, we left a carton outside the house. Outdoor temperature about 0 degrees Fahrenheit. After an hour, we checked. Yup, the Yoo Hoo was still liquid at zero degrees. At zero degrees. Yes. Okay, so look, we have Littners in Australia, England, Canada, all over the world. Zero degrees. That's Fahrenheit, not Celsius.

[B]

No, no.

[C]

Yeah. Which Celsius? It's like negative 33.

[B]

I don't know.

[C]

I don't know. The conversion. Are you looking that up, Gary? You get the crack. After another hour, as the outdoor temperature dropped, the Yoohoo continued in its liquid form.

[B]

Final negative 17.7 degrees Celsius.

[C]

Finally, after 24 hours in temperatures of negative 20 Fahrenheit, Yoohoo froze into an ugly brown block. Photo attached.

[B]

Now, this to me says if you're driving somewhere and you run out of antifreeze in your radiator, you could theoretically to get to the next town or you in it. And. And as a stopgap.

[C]

So now, Garrett and I are not auto mechanics, but our under our understanding is that that would work and that'd be totally fine.

[B]

I mean, your car would be destroyed, but it would have a great chocolate scent.

[C]

In case you're wondering, we didn't chop it up and fr. And eat frozen block Yoohoo. Why? Why would you do that? You wouldn't serve that to prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. Also because it wouldn't be able to freeze that. It wouldn't have the ability Cuba. We also boiled some Yoohoo and threw it in the air at negative 10 degrees Fahrenheit. Fahrenheit temperatures. Steam shot into the air. But the Yoohoo fell to the ground unharmed and unbrozen. She sent us. She sent us video of water that came down and then Yoohoo. That came down.

[B]

See, people do that where it's so cold they take water and they throw it up in the air and it instantly turns to, you know, just ice.

[C]

For the Yahoo. Fell to the ground unharmed and unfrozen. We did the same thing with boiling water. It seemed to be closer to freezing as it fell. Video attached. So my Yoohoo experiment. Experiments have only. And thank you, Sheila, for your contributions to science.

[B]

Tireless. If she's not nominated for a Nobel Prize. For a Nobel Peace Prize. Nobel Prize in science, I mean.

[C]

Oh, I think Peace Prize.

[B]

If we could send this to. I mean, physics or which.

[C]

Which one of the.

[B]

I mean, it could be chemistry, it could be physics.

[C]

So many.

[B]

I mean, it could be. For writing at this point, she's a Nobel Laureate.

[C]

Yes, that's right. So my Yoohoo experiments have only served to confirm every claim you've made about the abominable drinks, thus adding to your credibility as spouters of trivia and knowledgeable podcasters. Keep up the good work and keep inspiring and enlightening us. Look forward to 2026. No animals were harmed during the Yoohoo experiments, though my daughter's Alaskan husky seemed very interested. So that's from Sheila. And Garrett and I laughed about that.

[A]

It was amazing.

[C]

We watched the videos. It was very, very, very, very funny. Garrett was on his flight to Israel when we got the email, and so we were going back and forth on the. On the flight. Anyway, Sheila, that was very impressive.

[B]

I'm sure she's excited to get back to Hawaii after any time. In Fairbanks, Alaska.

[C]

Yes. Is there time for that email now or. No. Do we need to push it? We have. We're at, I don't know, 50 minutes. Something. I don't know.

[B]

Sure, let's do it.

[C]

Okay. Comes to us from a missionary. Elder. Something.

[B]

Okay. Well, very.

[C]

Do you have the email?

[B]

I mean, I do. I don't know if you wanted to announce who it was or read part.

[C]

Of it, but I didn't have it pulled up and so I was just. I don't know if it was obvious. Yeah, I didn't think it was obvious. I thought I played it off perfectly.

[B]

Yes. It was as if you were a Yoohoo trying to freeze in sub zero temperatures. Do you really think it was out there for 24 hours, by the way.

[C]

Oh, I. First of all, Sheila has so much credibility with me that I believe every word she says. And if she. If she were to send me an.

[B]

Email, if she started religion. Okay, well, we have an elder who wrote to us, and, you know, maybe I won't use his name just because he's talking about someone that he knows that's asking questions. And so I'll protect the anonymity, but they are from Missouri, and they wanted to let us know that, in fact, they do pronounce it with the at the end and Missouri. Yeah. He pronounces his home state Missoura.

[C]

Very good.

[B]

He also made some. Comments about how well, you know, if you think Missouri is a horrible place. I went to Utah once, and it's not winning any awards. You know, he does say he loves Missouri, and he's like, when I first got to Utah, it was not very appealing, except the mountains, although almost nobody wanted to kill me there.

[C]

You know what's funny? It's funny. I had a guy in my MTC district from Missouri, and he also was quite fond of Missouri.

[B]

Yeah, I think most people are quite proud of their state.

[C]

He talks, sure. But he talked about Zion all the time and just kept reminding people that they'd be coming to visit him when eventually that was.

[B]

I might be serving here on my mission in Utah, but you're coming back to me eventually. He brought up the fact that, you know, living where he does in Missouri, that there are obviously lots of people that have different views there from different branches of. Of restoration branches that have broken off from the church. Right. So there's lots of different groups. I mean, most notably the community of Christ, but there have been, you know, a dozen plus breakoffs from that group as well. So there's a lot of people in Missouri who believe in the Book of Mormon but aren't members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Right. And so he asked this question because he has a friend, and then he, you know, this is how, you know, he's an honest elder. He admits they happen to be a girl. Dan. It's a girl I like very much.

[C]

There you go.

[B]

Okay. All right, Elder, Now I know where this is really coming from. And we think you should contact us with all of your dating questions since we are not qualified in any way to handle them. Clearly a friend of his that he, you know, he knows from back home, and this person's been arguing to him that. That Brigham Young was not the rightful heir of Joseph Smith and this was the quote they, their, their friend sent them. And he said, look, I don't have the ability to look any of this up because I'm not. I'm a missionary. Basically, there were like three or four different times and places where Joseph Smith did the laying on of hands to bless and designate his son. That'd be Joseph Smith III as his successor or said that his son would succeed him. One place I know of is Liberty Jail. And another was the temple lot in Nauvoo with 3,000 witnesses where he answered a question about if he were to die, who would succeed him. And he pointed to his son and said that he would. This is a citation from Thomas Bullock's journal. A Blessing by Joseph Jr. To the young Joseph on the 17th of January 1844, to be my successor to the presidency of the high priesthood, a seer and revelator and prophet unto the church, which appointment belongeth to him by blessing and also by right. This is from a paper analyzing it. So, you know, clearly his friend is presenting this argument that, you know, Joseph Smith III was supposed to be the follower of the church. And obviously the friend is not, you know, some kind of PhD historian. And they're just having this discussion. But first and foremost, one of the things that jumps out is 17 January 1844. That's because this document, supposedly from Thomas Bullock's journal, which it was never from his journal, is purported to be from his papers, but in his handwriting is actually one of the Mark Hoffman forgeries. And it's been known as a forgery for 24 years at this point, 25 years. So I don't know if the friend was reading a really, really, really old article where that was discussed or they were using chat GPT and chat GPT because it can't tell the difference between a source that's real and one that's fake, pulled that up as proof that Joseph had blessed his son to be the successor. But that one, first of all is 100% fraudulent. It is the listed known Hoffman forgeries. Even though, you know, it might say what people want to hear. The another in this line of questioning. Right. Another was the temple lot, Nauvoo with 3,000 witnesses. I think where this comes from is actually not the temple lot in Nauvoo. This is from the temple lot trial, which also has a lot to do with plural marriage. So sorry for everybody, you know, ended up talking about it again. But what happened is the reorganized church and another church were disputing who had rightful ownership of the Original temple lot in Jackson County, Missouri. And it went to multiple court cases. And the Hedrickite church that possessed it was refuting claims by the Reorganized Church that the Reorganized Church rightfully should have owned it as the rightful successor from Joseph Smith. And so that's why this all came up. Well, there is someone in. In the. That trial who does make the claim that Joseph Smith said that. That his son would be the successor were anything to happen to him. The problem is that person in that trial also apparently is saying things that we know at one point they refuted. So this person, their name's James Whitehead. He says, I recollect a meeting was held in winter of 1843, prior to Joseph's death, where the appointment was made by him, Joseph Smith, of his successor. His son Joseph was selected as his successor. Joseph did the talking. So I think that's what the friend means when they say at the Nauvoo Temple lot. I think what they mean is it's from the temple lot case, which is an 1892 case, a court case in which this testimony is given. The problem is, part of this testimony also includes things like the doctrine of polygamy was never taught by the elders or high priests or by any other person or persons of authority in that church. The doctrine of polygamy was. Has never been, to my knowledge, taught or practiced by any person in the Reorganized Church because we did not believe in it. And if anybody has taught or practiced it, they'd been cut off mighty quick. So he makes a claim that it was never, ever, ever taught. Well, the reason why that's a dubious claim is the same person, James Whitehead, actually is recorded by leaders of the Reorganized Church stating that Joseph Smith practiced plural marriage. So, I mean, that is kind of a problem, right, because, you know, he says that it never happened, but he also is a person who changes that opinion. Right. So he gives different. He gives different accounts when it comes to plural marriage. So look, is it a source? Yes. Is it a very difficult source? Yeah, because, you know, in 1864, he tells Alexander Hale Smith, another, you know, child of Joseph Smith, that in fact, Joseph had taught and practiced plural marriage. And that is, you know, a. A demonstration that at least some part of his testimony is not really accurate. It was never, ever, ever taught. Joseph never taught it. But you yourself are at an earlier point in your life telling people that Joseph did teach it. So there's some discrepancy there. This is another example, of course, where you can go through all of this and make all kinds of Arguments. Is it possible that Joseph designated his son to be successor? Of course it's possible. But the real determination of whether or not that took place, the real determination of which church is following what Joseph Smith taught, can really just be done by examining what Joseph Smith taught. And you don't even have to go very far. Joseph Smith loved and repeatedly taught the doctrine of baptism for the dead and work for the dead. Repeatedly, over and over and over again. Multiple letters to individuals in the church, multiple letters to the church, multiple things that are in the doctrine of covenants, revelations surrounding it, ideas about it, descriptions of it, the entire purpose of building the temple with the oxen basin in the basement for the baptisms. There is no way to make a historical argument that Joseph Smith was not certain that baptisms for the dead were an essential part of the gospel. So which church practices baptisms for the dead? It's a very easy question to answer. It's also very clear that Joseph Smith believes that other temple ordinances are essential for exaltation. There are hundreds and hundreds of documents that relate to Joseph Smith teaching this, including his Doctrine and Covenants, Section 124, which is a gigantic revelation talking about the essential nature of the temple, the essential nature of the work done in it, the essential nature of washings and anointings, of endowments, of the. The work for the dead. Why is Joseph saying that we cannot be made perfect without our dead and our dead cannot be made perfect without us? Why is he teaching this if temple work and work for the dead is not essential? Now, I understand someone can argue who's from one of these groups. Well, yeah, I know Joseph said that, but I don't think that was essential doctrine. I think he was just being experimental in his theology, and I think he just was saying things that, that, you know, he was just speculating, but it wasn't actually essential. Okay, I understand why you believe that, and I understand that it's fine to have that belief, but there's no way to argue that that belief, a rejection of current practice of baptism for the dead, that that comes from Joseph Smith. There just isn't. All kinds of discussions can be had about whether or not Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. But even scholars from the Reorganized Church, from the community of Christ, they will say it's clear that Joseph Smith did teach and practice plural marriage. So even anyone who's making the argument inside of that faith tradition is making the argument in opposition to what their own scholars have admitted. Again, you can say, well, but he realized it was a Mistake, yes, you can say those things. But to say that it's that Joseph, you know, realized it was wrong or Joseph was just speculating, you don't have sources for that. So I would say if you are looking for a church that continues to teach the things that Joseph was teaching all throughout his life and all throughout his time in Nauvoo, you don't go very far before you realize that there are a lot of things that he taught in Nauvoo that are just not being taught or accepted by the various other restoration branches. There are no temple works. There are no, you know, baptisms for the dead, no temple endowments. And yes, of course, someone can say Joseph Smith was in error in presenting those. But then it's. It's this person claiming that Joseph was an error. Not. Not the. The historical records. The records don't say that. Joseph never says, my bad. We never should have done baptisms for the dead, ever. So I think that's a really good way to. To, you know, if you're struggling to figure out, well, who really followed Joseph Smith, who really had those keys. I submit, of course, I obviously have a bias. I'm a member of the church. But I would submit that the church that continued to teach temple ordinances the way that Joseph Smith was teaching them is certainly more likely to be the successor to Joseph's teachings and priesthood than various other churches that are rejecting those teachings because they were so central to Joseph. You don't have to even be a. You don't have to be an expert on Joseph Smith to read the things that he says about baptisms for the dead to come away going, this is a really big deal to Joseph Smith. This is not casual. This is not speculative. This is not a single document. This is over the course of four years, over and over and over and over and over again, teaching it publicly, teaching it privately, reiterating it over and over and over again. And I just don't. I don't really see any ability to justify dropping it as a teaching with anything close to a claim that Joseph realized it. It was not a true doctrine. You basically have to say, well, I realize that it's not a true doctrine, so that's why I don't follow it. Okay. But I mean, some of the evidence of who's following Joseph Smith can be found in what they have to say about Joseph Smith. I mean, we've talked about before on this podcast that the Hedrickites, you know, they. Or the Bickertonites, they love the Book of Mormon. They believe every word of the Book of Mormon. They don't believe in a single revelation Joseph Smith ever received. So there are sliding scales of where people go with their faith. And I think, I believe it's obvious that the Quorum of the twelve Apostles and Brigham Young, they took Joseph Smith's teachings, every one of them, at their word. And that's why you see those teachings and temple work perpetuated in the church today. Well, we're way out of time. I'm sure Richard's frantic over there wondering why he did the Yoo Hoo.

[C]

Well, it was so good. Sheila's email was so good. We are way over time, but, Garrett, it's just great to have you back. I know that this is the second episode of the New Year, but it's the first one that since you're. Since you're back in the New year, since we recorded that one earlier. So, anyway, all right, thank you so.

[B]

Much for joining us. Hopefully I don't sound like a dying frog next next time, but probably still.

[C]

Yes, I hope so.

[A]

Thank you for listening to the Standard of Truth podcast, hosted by historian Dr. Garrett Dirkmot 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.