Joseph Smith — Honest Seer or Lying Polygamist?
🤔 Joseph Smith — Honest Seer or Lying Polygamist?
Let’s get straight to it.
If Joseph Smith was the prophet of the Restoration,
then he wasn’t a liar.
If he preached fidelity and purity,
then he didn’t secretly preach and practice adultery in God’s name.
But if Brigham Young needed polygamy to be true…
he also needed Joseph to be the one who started it.
That’s the setup.
Now here’s the evidence.
📜 1. Hyrum’s Testimony: “No Reference to the Present Time”
In a City Council meeting on June 10, 1844, Hyrum Smith said the “revelation” people were talking about referred to ancient times, not present practice:
“…in answer to a question concerning things which transpired in former days, and had no reference to the present time.”
(Source: Joseph Smith Papers, Vol. F-1, p. 82)
So either Hyrum lied…
or the Church did.
🧱 2. Joseph Publicly Denied Modern Polygamy
In the same meeting, Joseph said:
“…he preached on the stand from the Bible showing the order in ancient days having nothing to do with the present time.”
(Source: Nauvoo City Council Minute Book, Feb 1844–Jan 1845)
If Joseph taught polygamy privately,
why would he publicly call it irrelevant?
Was he a hypocrite… or was someone else rewriting history?
🕮 3. James Whitehead: Private Secretary to Joseph Smith
“I never heard him teach [polygamy], either publicly or privately… I was there in his office and with him continually… I would have known.”
Whitehead’s testimony in the Temple Lot Case is stunning:
He was Joseph’s private secretary.
He was present daily in the office and the home.
He never once heard polygamy taught, practiced, or hinted at.
He said the revelation printed by Brigham was not what he saw years earlier.
Whitehead called the Utah D&C 132 version a spurious forgery.
🕰️ 4. Timeline & Scribe Problems
William Clayton claimed to write the revelation in 3 hours—alone with Joseph and Hyrum.
But others, like W. W. Phelps, said multiple people helped, and it took 10–12 days.
Even worse?
On the exact day Clayton claimed “solitude,”
dozens of children were documented upstairs in Joseph’s store.
Noise, foot traffic, interruptions.
Not exactly the sacred silence you'd expect for a revelation of that magnitude.
🧯 5. Emma Smith: “It Is False in All Its Parts”
Brigham Young later said Emma burned the original revelation.
Emma’s reply?
“It is false in all its parts, made out of whole cloth, without any foundation in truth.”
She swore until her death:
Joseph never taught her polygamy.
She never saw such a document before 1853.
Brigham’s story was fabricated.
Who do you believe—Emma, or Brigham?
📈 6. Brigham’s Wives: The Real Growth Came After Joseph Died
Brigham: 1 wife in 1842, 2 in 1843… then 35 more after Joseph’s death.
Heber C. Kimball: Same pattern.
Why?
Because once Joseph was gone,
Brigham could claim Joseph started it all—
then backfill the story.
And the Saints, in grief and confusion,
trusted him.
✍️ 7. The Writing Style of D&C 132
Researchers like Enid DeBarthe and AI-assisted tools show:
The early core of the revelation likely came from Joseph.
The bulk of D&C 132 as we know it matches Brigham’s writing style.
It's not the voice of the restoration prophet.
It’s the voice of a man reshaping history to fit a new gospel.
📖 8. A Different Revelation Once Existed
The earliest sealing teachings did not include polygamy.
The original revelation, shown to James Whitehead by Bishop Whitney in 1848, had nothing about plural marriage.
Brigham’s version contradicts:
D&C 49:15–16: “One wife”
The original “Revelation on Marriage” (deleted in 1876)
Verse 7 vs. Verse 39: conflicting statements on sealing power
Verse 61 vs. 65: contradiction on consent
Inserted verses (v. 40–45) are clearly off-topic
Joseph said: “Any revelation that contradicts a former one is false.”
(TPJS, p. 215)
📣 Final Thought: The Real Joseph
So, was Joseph Smith a lying polygamist?
Or was he an honest seer whose legacy was rewritten by others?
The weight of testimony says:
He preached purity.
He warned of false revelations.
He died clean.
Brigham needed polygamy to justify his own path.
And to do that, he had to drag Joseph’s name into the mud.
But Joseph’s voice still speaks.
And the truth, at last, is rising again.
Comments