Responding to Joseph Smith Polygamy Denial - John Turner pt. 32 | Ep. 2115
February 20, 2026
12,370
419
122
4.37%
Search the Record
IndexedEvery word spoken in this episode is indexed. Type any phrase to jump straight to the moment it was said.
Type any word or phrase that may have been spoken. Click a result to seek the player to that exact moment.
Try a name, a topic, or a quoted line
Mormon Stories Podcast Episodes Around February 20, 2026
See what was published immediately before and after this episode.
2:25:40Joseph Smith's World on Fire in Nauvoo - John Turner pt 31 | Ep. 2112
1:10:32Now PlayingResponding to Joseph Smith Polygamy Denial - John Turner pt. 32 | Ep. 2115
Chapters
YouTube Description
as posted by the channelWelcome to Part 32 of our series with Dr. John G Turner, based on his new book Joseph Smith: The Rise and Fall of an American Prophet.
In this episode, Dr. Turner response directly to modern claims denying Joseph Smith’s plural marriage to Sarah Ann Whitney. We revisit Chapter 26 of his book, carefully examining the historical record surrounding the 1842 letter often associated with Sarah Ann Whitney, the language of sealing and “fulness of blessings,” the land deed, and the broader documentary context of Nauvoo-era plural marriage.
We also engage with alternative interpretations, including arguments that question whether the letter refers to polygamy at all. Drawing on Turner’s scholarship as well as Karen Hyatt’s analysis, this discussion models how historians weight evidence, examine primary sources, and wrestle with ambiguity. What constitutes strong documentation? How do historians interpret silence, denials, and later public statements? And how should we think about the broader context of Joseph Smith’s practice of plural marriage in Nauvoo?
Along the way, we explore the legal crisis surrounding the alleged assassination attempt on Lilburn Boggs, the Nauvoo writ of habeas corpus, the Sarah Ann Whitney Letter, Public denials and private sealings, sham marriages and the case of Joseph Kingsbury, documentation involving the Partridge sisters and why serious historical inquiry requires both skepticism and careful contextualization.
We invite you to read Chapter 26 alongside this discussion and let us know your thoughts in the comments. To read Karen Hyatt’s interpretation download her free book here
To watch Karen Hyatt’s videoThe Worst Love Letter… EVER! click here
To visit Karen's website click here
Let us know in the comments how you interpret the evidence.
If you’d like to help keep this project going, please consider donating to support this series. Your support makes long-form, in-depth historical discussion like this possible!
Purchase John Turner’s book here
Show notes can be found on the Mormon Stories blog here
Timecodes:
___________________
At Mormon Stories we explore, celebrate, and challenge Mormon culture through in-depth stories told by members and former members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as well as scholars, authors, LDS apologists, and other professionals.
Our overall mission is to:
1. Facilitate informed consent amongst LDS Church members, investigators, and non-members regarding Mormon history, doctrine, and theology
2. Support Mormons (and members of other high-demand religions) who are experiencing a religious faith crisis
3. Promote healing, growth and community for those who choose to leave the LDS Church or other high demand religions
🤝Help us continue to deliver quality content by becoming a donor today
Onetime or recurring donations
Join this channel to get access to perks:
Our Platforms:
🌐Mormon Stories Blog
🍎Apple Podcasts
🖼️Instagram
Contact us:
📧 MormonStories@gmail.com
📬PO Box 171085, Salt Lake City, UT 84117
Links & Promotions
Guests & Subjects Covered
Sentinel Indexing in Progress
Metadata and chapters are available. Claim extraction for this episode is pending.
All video content is delivered via YouTube embedded players in accordance with the YouTube Terms of Service. Sentinel provides research tools that promote discovery and accountability across political media.