John Dehlin: Hello. Oops. Hello, everyone, and welcome to another edition of the Mormon News Podcast. I am your co Host for today, Dr. John Dehlin. It is August 14, 2026. I am here with Megan from Generally unquotable. Hey, Megan.

Meggan Hayes: Hey. Good morning.

John Dehlin: Good morning. And the thumbnail for today says fair or feral DS warns Satan want you to leave. So that's the teaser. But we've got a lot of great stuff to cover today on the Mormon News Podcast. What's up, Megan? What's going on?

Meggan Hayes: Oh, in the Mormon world, always so much. I think I sent you a text yesterday or the day before that. This is the hardest thing I've ever done trying to find all the stuff that's happened this week and put it into a newscast that's going to be under, you know, three, four hours.

John Dehlin: Well, we'll see. We'll see. Well, I've got an announcement I want to make before we actually dive into the substance, but let's give teasers. So tell us what's in store for us today, Megan.

Meggan Hayes: Okay. We're going to be Talking about the fair conference that happened the 5th through the 7th, I believe it was, of August, and going through some clips for that. We are not going to cover the whole conference today, but we are going

John Dehlin: to our viewers and listeners who fair is for those who don't know.

Meggan Hayes: Oh, fair lds it stands for. Now I'm blanking.

John Dehlin: Apologists. Mormon apologists.

Meggan Hayes: Yes, yes. A group of people who spend a lot of time trying to make the church make sense.

John Dehlin: I love it. So they had a conference and so we're going to be reviewing a little bit of it. Is that right?

Meggan Hayes: Yeah. There's going to be a lot more to come in the future, so keep an eye out for that.

John Dehlin: A couple dedicated episodes about that.

Meggan Hayes: Yes.

John Dehlin: Okay.

Guest: All right.

John Dehlin: What else?

Meggan Hayes: We got an article from the Friend magazine. Are there girl bishops and how the church deals with that? Then we're going to be talking about BYU and how they're trying to get CUPID on their campus so they can get more people married.

John Dehlin: Okay.

Meggan Hayes: We're going to talk about how Miss North Carolina lost her title and how she is saying that that happened because she's a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

John Dehlin: Yeah.

Meggan Hayes: Then we'll this has been big news this week. Chandler Hendry passed away in a car accident. So we'll talk about that. There's been a lot of dialogue about that online this week. And then we have two just little extras where we'll talk about some Reddit conversations and then an update on Dallin Oaks because his birthday happened recently.

John Dehlin: Okay, excellent. Well, thanks for being here, Megan, and thanks for all the work you do. Let me make a quick, Let me welcome our live audience. We love having them. Let me thank Trevor, Trevor Nunn for helping to moderate along with all Julia does for us as well. Want to remind people that if you want us to see your live chat comments, you can send them a super chats and that will help make sure we see them. It also provides a little bit of a donation to us so that we can financially keep doing what we're doing. I want to thank the donors to the Mormon Stories podcast. You make this possible. 80% of our revenue, I think, is donors, not, you know, ads. So thanks for those who support us. If you want, if you don't financially support us and you want to, you can go to mormonstories.org donate but there's a better way and let me explain that now. So I have been trying to. This is a little bit of an announcement. I've been wanting to up our game in the Mormon news area for a long, long, long time and helping Bill Real and Rebecca Biblioteca and RFM create the Mormon newscast that happens every week. You know, they do all the work now, but I will say I think that was my brainchild and I really wanted to see that happen. So I partnered with them early on to get it going and then for a bunch of reasons, I had to drop out. But I'm thrilled that, that, that they're doing what they're doing and they do a great job and I want to see it thrive and continue. Megan, you do a really, really crucial job in Mormon news and that's one of the reasons I parted with you, partnered with you to do the weekly Mormon news podcast here. And I've owned the MormonNews.com domain for a long, long time and I've just sit on it, I've sat on it relatively unused up until this week. So one of the things I've been working on for everybody is A, a version one launching of a new website called MormonNews.com and I want all of you to check it out. Not for what it can bring, what value it can bring to you today. I want you all to go to mormonnews.com to help me decide what we can do to make it useful for people's consumption of Mormon news going forward. So let me describe what it is now and then invite you to give me feedback on what it can be And Megan, I want to hear your feedback on this as well. This is the website. Now@mormonnews.com we've chosen the color orange, hopefully for obvious reasons. And the website does two things primarily. Number one is it's where this podcast's home is going to be. So, Megan, you and I are doing this weekly podcast. Sometimes Nemo helps out. And the podcast needs its own home because even though it's distributed through Mormon Stories Podcast, which we want to continue to help, give it maximum exposure, it deserves its own website. So half of what this podcast, this website is, mormontnews.com is now the home. So you can go to this mormonnews.com and on the right hand side, it says Mormon News Podcast. And if you click on that little link there, it provides all the episodes of previous weeks. And then it also loops in past news episodes that we did. Historically, a lot of those were with Gerardo or with Cara Burrell. But as long as it was talking about Mormon news, I didn't mind incorporating that. So that's the first thing. If you want a centralized place to look at episodes from the Mormon News podcast, you can find that here. There's a little link that says the podcast. That's how you can jump to it. It's also on the front page on right side. Now, the other thing that we're doing on the left side is we're aggregating what we hope are the most important and interesting news stories all across the Internet so that you can go to a single place to get news. Now, I know that Reddit does a good job of that. And we, we don't even see Reddit. We don't want to compete with Reddit and we don't want Reddit to see us as a competitor. We love ex Mormon Reddit and Mormon Reddit and LDS Reddit, and we want to see it continue. And if somebody just wants a central place to find the best news, whether it's Deseret News, Salt Lake Tribune, Reddit, YouTube, wherever, we want them to also be able to have a place where they can find the best stories, the most important stories. So that's what's happening as well on this website. So every hour, this website crawls, you know, the, the Mormon Internet as best as it can under certain categories. So there's LDS Church news. You can see a tab there where it's LDS Church news that's news just affecting the church broadly. Rebecca Biblioteca asked me to create a temple section because she's obviously always interested in what's going on with temples. I created a Joseph Smith section because I'm always interested in what's going on with Joseph Smith. There's a polygamy section as well if you want to know what's being said about polygamy broadly. And then there's a sports section, a YouTube section, an influencer section. And then I added a child abuse section because obviously a lot of us think that the the biggest opportunity for improvement slash. The place for biggest harm in the Mormon Church currently is around child abuse. We also have not shown in the menu a couple other sections as well. And what you can do is you can go to the front page and you can see an aggregation of LDS, church temples, Joseph Smith, polygamy, child abuse, influencers, YouTube and sports there on the homepage. Or you can drill down and then of course you can search, you know, to ask for information on lawsuit, let's just say delin lawsuit and if you hit enter, it's going to return articles on the delin lawsuit. Or let's just say you care about fair, LDS or fair, you can search and there it is. You can find articles about fair in theory. So whatever you want to learn about, you can do searches for it. And then the final thing I want to note is we've put a donate button there so that those who want to donate to this particular and let me just show those who want to donate particularly to this website or to this podcast can donate directly to the podcast. And those funds will be used specifically for the podcast and the website. So that's the new project. And here's again what I want to say. That's just what I've done in the last few days and weeks. What I'm interested in more is what we can do to make this website really impactful going forward. Because there's an argument to say we don't need another news aggregator. You can just aggregate news from going setting a news alert on Mormon or LDS from Google News. Why would you need an aggregator? And my answer is I don't know. What I know is I have mormonnews.com I have the ability to make it whatever we want. We have this podcast. What else can we do? What else would be interesting? So. So dream big, everybody. If you have ideas on how mormonnews.com can help change the game regarding Mormon news, Mormon news commentary, I want to hear your feedback. You can actually send your feedback specifically to AdminOrMondNews.com or you can send them to me@MormonStoriesGmail.com and of course, I'm sure you have ways to get feedback as well. So really quickly, I know I've taken already a good five minutes of our show. Any thoughts, Megan? Because I haven't really even talked to you about this yet.

Meggan Hayes: My plan is to use the site this week and then get a feel for it and see, you know, what I think could be added or maybe what's not working well, because I think that's the best way to really dive in is just to. As I'm preparing my news stories this week, I'll go there first and see what happens. But as for now, I like it. I like the design. It's very clean. It's an easy way to get in there and see all the news at once. Yeah.

John Dehlin: And if you find it's missing, if people find it's missing important stories or not sharing the good stories or doing something wonky, we've tried to build a feature where if there's multiple stories about the same topic, that it aggregates those stories under a single story and then you can drill down and see others. But yeah, please give us all the feedback also, in terms of how good it is at choosing the right stories and what we could do to make it better at selecting the right stories. Anyway, I hope you think that's cool, Megan. I hope you're okay with us having a homepage for this podcast and let's just see where it goes from there.

Meggan Hayes: Yes, absolutely. No, I've had a couple of people reach out to me and be like, did you see this? This is so cool. And I was like, oh, yeah, of course, John. Reach out to me. And they're like, well, how do you feel? I'm like, I don't actually know. So every morning when I wake up, I just have to remind myself that this is my life and I get to live it and it's pretty exciting.

John Dehlin: Well, one thing I want to do is include a link to important Mormon news outlets. And I can include a link to Generally Unquotable because I want you to thrive. And I can include a link to, you know, Mormon Ish, because Rebecc does such great work. I can include a link to to the Mormon News podcast with Radio Free Mormon and Bill Real and any anywhere else, including Mormon Land podcast and other really credible outlets for Mormon news. Because I just think we need more and better outlets for Mormon news, and most importantly, more and better thoughtful commentary and analysis on Mormon news. And that's what we're trying to do here.

Guest: Right.

John Dehlin: So anyway, Remind me to put a link to great outlets, because that clearly is something I could do to improve this website. Because I want a rising tide to lift all ships. I'm not trying to take over this space. I'm trying to grow a healthy news ecosystem with this website. Does that make sense?

Meggan Hayes: Absolutely.

John Dehlin: Yes. All right. All right. I hope you feel, Megan, that I want you to thrive and succeed separate from me, and I want everyone else to feel that way as well.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah, no, I have felt successful to the point of not always knowing what to do with it.

John Dehlin: Okay. All right, well, thanks for letting me take a little bit of time at the beginning. Let's jump back to the wonderful program that you've. That you've designed for us today. Where do we start?

Meggan Hayes: Well, we're going to start with breaking down a few clips from fair. And like I said, I started diving into the conference and the amount of clips that I wanted to show was overwhelming. So I focused a lot on the first speaker, who is Scott Gordon, and then just a couple of clips from a few other people and then with the promise that we will continue on in a different episode.

John Dehlin: Okay, so this is just a teaser, a taste. Okay. And so. So right off the bat, I see this guy. He might think of me as a nemesis or my. My low brain might think of him as a nemesis. This is Scott Gordon. He is for at least two decades, as I recall, the founder or the. Or the leader at FAIR LDS or FAIR Mormon. And so we're. It's fitting, Megan, that we start with Scott Gordon. So anything you want to say before we start this first clip?

Meggan Hayes: Oh, no, I think we should listen to it.

John Dehlin: Alrighty. All right, let's hear what Scott Gordon has to say.

Guest 2: Throughout history, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has faced a variety of attacks. The details may change, but the objective remains the same. Satan, our ultimate adversary, does not particularly care whether people leave the church because of scripture, history, politics, social issues, or personal offense. He simply wants them to lose faith in Jesus Christ and his restored gospel and leave. He often does this by disrupting trust in faithful sources. He leads us down a path where we end up trusting negative or sensational claims, assigning negative motivations, and engage in mind reading of current and historical figures.

John Dehlin: Okay, Megan, what do you think is interesting about that?

Meggan Hayes: He is setting up such a binary. And this is the way he started the conference. He's the first speaker on Wednesday night, and he's saying, you know, things are either negative or they're positive. I mean, that's the message that I'm receiving from him, and he's like, we need to take all of these negative things and get rid of them and just focus on the positive, which is just not realistic. If you look at life as a whole, it's not realistic to function that way. And if he's looking at church history or church doctrine, it's also not just helpful when trying to be a whole person to look at things that way.

John Dehlin: Yeah. My reaction is, first of all, it's such an talk about anachronisms. It's such an outdated way to look at the world. To look at the world in terms of Satan and his influence. Like, maybe he really believes that there's an evil Satan out there with all his minions of evil spirits working evil in the hearts of podcasters everywhere. That's just not. That's like witchcraft. That's like Ouija board garbage. That's superstition. That's as dumb of folk magic as Joseph Smith looking for lost buried treasure with the seer stone and a hat. What is operating right now in the Mormon Internet is not a demonic spirit influencing people. It's literally the fact that the church, for all the good that it does, the church has harmed a lot of people as well. And it's also deceived and misinformed a lot of people. And so what's happening on the Internet, Scott Gordon and Fairmormon in our listenership, is that Megan and John and Rebecca and RFM and Bill real feel, feel and felt called and Julia and everyone else feel and felt called to say truth matters, history matters, people being harmed matters. So let's lift our voices and help there be less harm in Mormonism writ large, more truth in Mormonism writ large, more thoughtful discussion in Mormonism writ large so that we can be healthier as a broad Mormon community. That's what's happening. And I don't know about you, Megan, I think we've talked about this before. I'll say it a thousand times. I am not. I do not exist and do what I do to destroy faith. I have no problem with faith. I have no problem with people being members of the church. I have no problem with the church being healthy and thriving. What I want is that people who want to base their lives on reality can do that. I want there to be science and evidence based and evidence and science based, informed decisions. And I want people to know and understand the history via informed consent so they can make informed decisions if they want to. And if they decide to stay or leave the church, I don't care. I just want the church to be honest and to harmless people and then to help the people who want or need to leave. So this, this framing of Satan doing evil and us trying to tear away faith, it's not only rhetorically offensive, it's just plain wrong. He doesn't. After 21 years, Scott Gordon just can't get himself to see what motivates us at our core. And I think that's the biggest problem I have with Fair Mormon. They don't actually listen to critics to get to understand what they actually think and care about and what motivates them. They just assume the worst motives and set up straw men to paint us as evil so that they can then make their score their points.

Meggan Hayes: Yes, yes. Like that's, that's why his binary is so powerful because it gives him this space where he is right and we are wrong. And so his curiosity is stymied by that. It makes it, I think, hard for him to look outside of that and see us as people, as humans who could sit right next to him and probably have a lot in common.

John Dehlin: Yeah, beautiful. So well said. But, but also is he powerful? Is he effective? Like my. One of the main key learnings I've had for the past 24, 21 years is Mormon apologetics like Fair Mormon are two things. They're a channel to people losing their faith because they talk about all the problematic issues. So Fair Mormon is part of the informed consent process because they talk about the issues when the church won't. Fair Mormon actually does as good of a job or better than the rest of the ex Mormon Internet on educating members about the problems with the church. And then secondly they give such bad arguments, such mean spirited ad hominem arguments or illogical or unscientific justifications and arguments that, that smart believers can see through their bad argumentation and it, it ends up in the long run, deteriorate deteriorating faith. And so I, I don't know that he, if he thinks that we're satanic. I think Scott Gordon and Fair Mormon should look in the mirror because just like I believe Russell and Nelson and Downate jokes have taken more people out of Mormonism than all of the ex Mormon Internet combined with the November 2015 policy and its rescission in 2019. I think Fair Mormon and those like them have taken way more people out of Mormonism than the ex Mormon Internet.

Meggan Hayes: Right. Because that's not even our goal. Like you said, we, we aren't here to take people out. We're, I mean I don't know about you, but I'm here to give them a place to go when they are out. To give them a safe place to say I was harmed by this or I don't understand it. And for that to be okay, for them not to feel so lonely that they don't want to stay on earth anymore.

John Dehlin: Yeah.

Meggan Hayes: And for them to process everything that happened in a place where if they decide to go back, that that's okay. Right. Like you said, a non judgmental space that they can land and start the process of. What do I want to do next?

John Dehlin: Yeah, I'm going to make it right out the beginning. I'm making an offer to Fair Mormon and to the Mormon Church. If anyone in the Mormon Church or Fair Mormon wants to meet with me or us and collaborate with us on how we can more effectively work together for the good of the broader community, I will do that. In my mediation with the Mormon Church during the lawsuit where they were suing me, there was a point where I literally said to the mediator, ask the other side if they have any interest in, instead of suing me and demeaning me, ask them if they want to collaborate on how to work together for the benefit of everyone. And of course I got no positive response from that. I don't know what the mediator shared with the other side, but I'm going to offer that to Scott Gordon and Fair Mormon. If you don't like what Mormon Stories is doing, I'm willing to listen because I want to do good and you know, but, but we need to talk about that. All right, so that's all. Should we go to the next clip?

Meggan Hayes: Yep.

John Dehlin: All right, let's do it.

Guest 2: Throughout history, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has faced a variety of attacks. The details may change, but the objective remains the same. Satan, our ultimate adversary, does not particularly care whether people leave the church because of scripture.

John Dehlin: We already play this.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah.

John Dehlin: Okay. Wait, that I, I, Are they the same clips?

Meggan Hayes: Then go to five.

John Dehlin: Okay, okay. I'm sorry, I, I, I thought I played three.

Meggan Hayes: First three was just a slide. It's not a, it's not a clip.

John Dehlin: Oh, got it, got it, got it. Okay. Sorry everyone. Thank you for that. My, my bad. Next clip.

Guest 2: Fair as a policy, now avoids debates. So I thought I would debate myself to illustrate what it was like. As I am debating myself, I am optimistic I might possibly win. You believe that you can become gods. That's Satan's plan. Satan said so in Genesis. 3, 4, 5, you shall not surely die. You shall be as the gods, knowing good and evil. But you failed to turn the page to see God's response to this, where he says in verse 22 of the same chapter, and the Lord God said, behold, the man has become as one of us to know good and evil. Satan speaks in half truths. Half of what he said here was true as it was repeated by God. He talks about this in Romans 8, 16 and 17, where he says, we are children of God, and if children, then heirs. Heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ. In Acts 28 it says, for we are also his offspring. Even the early Christians wrote about this. If the Bible says it and the early Christians repeat it, the real question becomes, why don't you believe it? And how did Joseph Smith know what those early Christians taught?

John Dehlin: Wow. Wow what? I'm dying to hear what you liked about that clip.

Meggan Hayes: I was just trying to give a flavor of. Because he spends a good portion of his speech doing that where he's debating himself. And that portion stuck out to me because the next clips will kind of go through it a little bit. The evolution of the church's theology about who God was, who he is now, and how we're supposed to become like him has changed so much. And it made me curious as to whether if Scott had existed in the early parts of the church, he even would have said the same thing that he just said. And how fair kind of evolves along with the church and is at the forefront of the talking points that they use to keep people, for better. Lack of a better phrase in line. So. But he, he spent a lot of time doing that debate. And it just made me laugh at the beginning when he said, I'm debating myself, so I'll probably win.

John Dehlin: Well, the one point I grabbed from that is. And I, I just wish. It's so weird. He says that Satan speaks in half truths. And of course Satan isn't speaking. So what he means is ex Mormons speak in half truths. And I just, I just, I want to look at this guy and say, Scott Gordon, have you at all objectively looked at how the Mormon Church has communicated its history and its truth claims for the past 200 years? Like Mirror, Meet Scott Gordon. Like, the church has been deceptive and incomplete and in its telling of history for 200 years, we in the ex Mormon community are a response to the Church's hiding and deceptions around its history and truth claims. So it's like finger pointing at us, three fingers pointing back. Scott, can you really, with the straight face and a sincere Heart accuse ex Mormons of being the deceptive ones versus what the church's history has been. The Gospel topics essays in the Joseph Smith Papers Project. Why? And the books. What's the book? Saints.

Meggan Hayes: Yes.

John Dehlin: And, you know, whatever else we want to celebrate as being refreshing in 2026. Why are they. Why are they worth celebrating? It's because for the previous 200 years, the church has been deceptive and hiding about its history. So I'm just. I'm stunned that he's laying that on us when really he should be looking in the mirror at himself and the church.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah. Go to the next slide. We'll see how half of a truth has been abandoned.

John Dehlin: Okay, thank you.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah. In 1840, Lorenzo Snow said, as man now is, God once was, and God as God now is, man may be. And in 1844, Joseph Smith said, God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. That is the great secret. And then in time magazine on August 4th of 1997, Gordon B. Hinckley was asked about that God the Father was once a man as we were. This is something that Christian writers are always addressing. Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was once a man like we are? And Gordon Hinckley answered in a half truth, I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it. I haven't heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don't know. I don't know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it, but I don't know a lot about it, and I don't know that others know a lot about it.

John Dehlin: Okay, now, is that from Scott's presentation, or did you put that together?

Meggan Hayes: No, I put that together.

John Dehlin: So it's an example of. Of who's telling the half truths, right?

Meggan Hayes: Yes. Yes. Well, and he's. He's going through this whole diatribe about, I'm debating a Bible basher. Right. And this is how I'm going to do it. And I'm going to win because I'm debating myself. But they're asking us why we believe that we can become like gods. And I'm going to tell them this scripture and this scripture and this scripture, and I'm like, Scott, you. Your own church has changed your theology. Theology on. On who God is and how you

John Dehlin: believe that and a million other things.

Meggan Hayes: Yes. Yeah. So I just thought that was a really good example. And the next.

John Dehlin: Yeah. And I, like, I think it's worth asking, like, I. I think Scott Gordon is a good guy in a way. So, like, why can't they just be honest and say, yeah, the church hasn't been honest and this backlash is in response to the church not being honest. Why do they have to then accuse us of what the church is guilty of? You know, why can't they see it? Is it just. They know they'll get in trouble with the church if they lay the blame on the church, or do you think they really just can't see that the church is the core of the problem? What's your opinion, Megan?

Meggan Hayes: I think there are probably a lot of them who can't see. Like, if I look back at myself when I was a Relief Society president and I was struggling in the church and defending it at the same time, because from my very first breath, it was all that I had known. I didn't have any way to look outside of that and look in. And I don't know if this. That's the case with Scott, but it could be. It could be that this is his entire worldview.

John Dehlin: I mean, I would say yes, except there's a point. You know, the guys at Curt McConkey know the guys and gals at Kurt McConkey know there's an abuse problem, a child abuse problem in the church because they're settling multiple child abuse cases every week. So there's a point. And same with fair. Fair knows the problems because they swim in the problems all day long. So it's hard to imagine that Scott hasn't swam in this stuff for so many decades that he doesn't really know in his heart of hearts, the church has been deceptive about its history and its truth claims. He's got to know. So maybe, I guess I can't go with you that he doesn't know better. I think the most charitable interpretation I can make is that he compartmentalizes. He knows that on some level, but he can't ever really have that be part of his rhetoric or even his decision making, because it wouldn't be good for him or the church for him to ever note that or talk about it in any meaningful way.

Meggan Hayes: I mean, it could be good for him to talk about it, but it definitely wouldn't be good for the church.

John Dehlin: How could it be good for Scott Gordon, in his role as head of fair, to constantly acknowledge that the ex Mormon problem is rooted in the church's historical deceptions?

Meggan Hayes: Well, it couldn't be good for him as Head affair. That would. He would have to step down from that position. But it could be good for him as a person. Maybe not for that part of his career. He'd have to do something else.

John Dehlin: Yeah, yeah.

Meggan Hayes: I mean, we would welcome him with open arms into the ex Mormon community, though.

John Dehlin: Yeah. I assume Scott knows what's best for him. But anyway, that's interesting. All right, let's go to the next clip.

Meggan Hayes: So this next clip is a follow up of the last slide. It's just showing how Gordon Hinckley then assured the. Oh, I love the Saints. Yeah, okay.

John Dehlin: Okay.

Meggan Hayes: That he knew what was going on.

John Dehlin: Okay. I personally have been much quoted and in a few instances, misquoted and misunderstood. I think that's to be expected. None of you need worry because you read something that was incompletely reported. You need not worry that I do not understand some matters of doctrine. I think I understand them thoroughly.

Meggan Hayes: And it is unfortunate that the reporting

John Dehlin: may not make this clear.

Meggan Hayes: I hope you will never look to

John Dehlin: the public press as the authority on

Meggan Hayes: the doctrines of the church.

John Dehlin: Wow. Yeah, that. And I. And I. I feel bad that I broke up the continuity between the previous slide and that video because that's one of the most blatant examples of dishonesty in modern Mormon history. Let me have you comment to that first, and then I want to go ahead.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah. So he was interviewed by Time magazine. He gave the response that I said where he said, I don't know that we really say that God was once a man. I don't know that we teach that. You know, and then in conference, he went in, this was just a few months later, and assured everyone, I, of course I know the doctrine. Don't you worry. Plus, I was probably just misquoted. It was just, you know, throwing his hands out there and magically wanting to make it all go away. And he's obviously in front of a rapt audience who thinks that it's a last line.

John Dehlin: Yeah. And he admits that he understands the doctrine thoroughly. Right. So what is it? So I. The only way. The only sense I can make of that is he takes lightly what the early prophets said. In other words, the only way I can square all that is that Gordon B. Hinckley didn't believe that if Joseph Smith or Brigham Young or Lorenzo Snow or whoever said whatever they said, that it's necessarily binding and authoritative. In other. You know what I'm saying? Because otherwise, I don't know how to square the fact that it was so clearly Mormon doctrine for so long that God was once A man. And that man can become gods. So either he's just deceptive, and I tend to like Gordon B. Hinckley and want to think he's not just a. An evil, deceptive person, or again, he compartmentalizes. Or he's actually saying the quiet thing out loud, which is Mormons take with a grain of salt things that previous prophets have said.

Meggan Hayes: Well, and how is this different from the half truths that Scott Gordon was talking about?

John Dehlin: And I think your microphone just went, oh, go tap on your mic really quick. Say it again. That's better.

Meggan Hayes: Okay. Okay. I turned it down a little bit because I was getting echo, but I can turn it back up a little bit.

John Dehlin: Oh, okay. Keep going.

Meggan Hayes: I was just. How. I was asking, how is this different than the half truths that Scott Gordon was talking about? I mean, what President Hinckley is doing, he's saying the parts that he needs to say when certain people are listening, and then he's changing his rhetoric when other people are listening.

Guest 3: Yeah.

John Dehlin: Yeah. Really quickly, Megan, as far as the echo goes, I don't know if there's a way to turn down the volume in your headset without turning down how loud your microphone comes through to us.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah, I can turn it down, but that's.

John Dehlin: That'll help you with the echo is if you're.

Meggan Hayes: Okay.

John Dehlin: Your headphones aren't feeding back into your microphone.

Meggan Hayes: Okay.

John Dehlin: That's usually how it works. Anyway, I don't mean to explain you, but that's my misunderstanding.

Meggan Hayes: No, I'm always fiddling with it.

John Dehlin: Anyway, I'm sorry. There's an echo that's really annoying and it gives you a headache. So anyway, to. To just close out our point. Yeah. Pot, kettle, like Scott Gordon really, is it. Is the. Is the half truth problem an ex Mormon problem, or is it a Mormon church leadership and a fair Mormon problem? And again, I believe, take the LDS discussion series, take CES letter, take Mormon Think.

Guest 3: Take.

John Dehlin: Take whatever catalog of discussion of truth claims. I think ex Mormons would always outshine fair Mormon in an objectivity test of who's being more accurate, who's being less biased, who's telling the most full truth,

Meggan Hayes: and who is accepting of critique and willing to change their mind and not

John Dehlin: just admitting that they're starting with a bias. Like, at least, unlike fair Mormon, I don't start saying I want to disprove everything and I want the church to die, and I want to interpret all the data in a way that kills faith and harms the church. That's not how I start. I just like, what's the history? What's the news story? Where's the science? What does the harm look like? That's where I start from. But fair Mormon often admits, they start that the church is true, and then all the rhetoric and the evidence gathering and the content that they create is shaped around those starting assumptions. So, you know, anyway, maybe we shouldn't even take their accusations too seriously, because they tell us up front all they're doing is trying to defend the Church. They're not actually interested in truth.

Meggan Hayes: Yes, their accusations say a lot more about them than they do about us.

John Dehlin: A thousand percent. Very well said.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah.

John Dehlin: All right, should we go to the next slide?

Meggan Hayes: The next slide just caps off that whole God was once a man thing, because now it pulls out the. What the current church website says, do letters? Do Latter Day Saints believe they can become gods?

John Dehlin: Okay, all right, let's play it.

Meggan Hayes: Oh, no, not this.

Guest 2: It was a little note here.

John Dehlin: Not this one. The one before it.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah.

John Dehlin: Oh, this slide.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah, it just. It just brings that discussion kind of full circle. So this is what they have on their website now.

John Dehlin: Okay. And summarize it for us.

Meggan Hayes: Well, they basically say. They basically ignore the whole God was once a man thing. They just don't even discuss that. Can Latter Day Saints become gods? And then they put some scriptures in there saying, yeah, we can. We can become like God. He wants us to become like him. So they're kind of skirting around it still, and they call it a caricature. Let's see, the sentence says, latter Day Saints believe that God wants us to become like him. But this teaching is often misrepresented by those who caricature the faith, which I thought was super interesting. So I spent a lot of time thinking about it, and this is what I came up with. Calling it a caricature makes it sound like critics invented the idea. But where did the caricature come from? Earlier LDS leaders in church materials explicitly talked about exalted people creating worlds and having spirit children. So it's just. Yeah, they. They get upset at the members for certain ideas that they have, but their ideas that the leaders actually preached at one point or another.

John Dehlin: Yeah, that's such a great point. And I think it's number one interesting. Why are we listening to fair Mormon about what Mormon doctrine is like? Isn't it the prophet seers and revelators job to tell us? But has. Has. Are you aware of any general conference talk that clarifies the theosis doctrine that says, hey, you know, how, you know, we believed Historically, that God was once a man and men can become gods. You know how that's been the pillar of the Mormon plan of salvation from the beginning? Well, that's not really what's going on. We as Mormons can become more and more like God, but we're never actually going to become gods. Has any prophet or apostle said that, ever?

Speaker F: No.

Meggan Hayes: No. And actually, it's funny, I was listening to David Bednar and Patrick here on this Week talking about the changes for the Sunday sessions that's coming up right where now they go to Priesthood and Relief Society every week and Sunday school every week. So all the meetings are going to be super short. And the entire point of their whole talk was the church can't provide everything for you and we can't provide you all of the doctrine that you need. You just need to study it out for yourself. So that's why it's okay if church is shorter, because we talk to God, but we just really can't be in charge of providing you with everything that you need. Which I know they can't provide him with everything, but it was just hilarious to me that they don't, they don't get up in conference and talk about the doctrine.

John Dehlin: Yeah, they don't. But, but it's odd that they. I mean, it's weird. There's some of the church headquarters, I mean, fair Mormon and fair lds, they don't just go off half cocked. They clearly feel like they have permission to basically reframe core Mormon doctrine on their website. And yet. Yes, so, and yet it's, it's, it's clear that the Mormon church leadership doesn't want this change to be disseminated broadly to the church directly or in its curriculum. So it's almost like the church leaders are saying, okay, fair Mormon and fair lds, we want you to be able to message the theosis doctrine in a way that combats critics and that then can also be used for the evangelical world and the broader world so that they don't think we're crazy, which is what Hinckley was trying to do. But at the same time, we're never going to really actually change the doctrine for the membership. And it must be the leaders that are allowing this duplicity, because Hinckley modeled the duplicity. So that's interesting. Is that. What does this tell us? Who cares about fair? What does this tell us about top Mormon church leadership? That it's. That core doctrine can change, but they won't ever tell the membership, but they'll allow an unofficial air quote Nonprofit, to combat critics with the change and to promote that change to the world for PR and marketing purposes. But they won't. The leaders of the church won't come clean themselves in any meaningful way.

Meggan Hayes: Yes. You know, I've heard you say this so many times in the past couple years. We've had a lot of Mormon true crime. Right. We've had Lori Valo and Chad Dabell and Ruby Frankie and the top leaders the same. They will not come out and say, y' all should probably stop reading Visions of Glory. But we, we're not going to get to this part of Scott Gordon's talk because there was just too much. He actually goes into how becoming part of those groups is apostasy. But that's something that the leaders won't say over the pulpit. They won't say that Lori Val and Chad Dabel were dangerous.

John Dehlin: Stop being a prepper. Right?

Meggan Hayes: Yeah, but Scott Gordon says it in this same address.

John Dehlin: Yeah, yeah. I mean, honestly, I think it makes sense. When you think about how Hinckley was taken to the woodshed for comments he made on Larry King and the Time magazine and the Mike Wallace. When you think about how Jeffrey R. Holland was smacked, gobble smacked by the BBC when he tried to speak candidly, you know, back in the day during the Romney campaigns, etc. I mean, the brethren, their average age is what, 80, 85? Like, first of all, they don't know how to address the problems. And then secondly, they're probably too old to do it effectively, even if they did know how to solve, you know, to speak to the problems. So I get why the Brethren don't want to ever touch any of this stuff and just want to speak in vague generalities and platitudes because they're not up to it, you know?

Meggan Hayes: Yeah, they're not. That's the other thing I was watching this morning was the video with Nemo and the guy who's an atheist, I can't remember. Yeah. And that's what he went to general conference and he was talking about how it was so boring. Yeah, it's like it was just really boring. I thought the, the prophets of God would say something, anything about current events, give us any shred of information or advice about how we should be acting in this crazy world we're in. And I got nothing.

John Dehlin: Yeah, yeah, yeah. And that's, it's tr. You know, but, but if you look back 40 years, they said a lot, but it was super cringy and harmful and anti scientific and homophobic and, and misogynistic. And racist. Like, I think they know now all they can do is speak pablum, because either they're going to say something racist, sexist, homophobic, or scientifically wrong or historically wrong, or they're going to make big changes that disrupt and destabilize the church. So instead, they're just going to give pablum, constant pablum to the members.

Meggan Hayes: Yep. Just Jesus in love and. Which is great. It's great. But a prophet of God should be giving us something that we don't already know.

John Dehlin: Yeah, it depends on how you define profit. We could talk about that another time. But, yeah, I'm changing what I, what I think the term prophet means, but we won't go into that today. Okay. Should we do the next clip, Megan?

Meggan Hayes: Yep. It's going to be more of Scott.

John Dehlin: Okay. All right, let's do some more.

Guest 2: Scott, you will note here in my discussion that nobody was convinced. So don't plan on many conversions coming from this kind of discussion. But knowing these responses can demonstrate the strength of our position and help youth, newer members, and young missionaries strengthen their confidence and faith while removing stumbling blocks that often come from family members and church pastors.

John Dehlin: Okay, Megan, what, What do you got? What, what, what was that shared for?

Meggan Hayes: I, I just like that he admitted that he showed them this whole debate and it's not going to win anybody over. Like you're wondering what he knows. I think deep down he knows that this is not for people who are investigating the faith for sure. And it's not for people who are already out. It's not going to convince those people.

John Dehlin: Yeah. You know, I'll never forget when Marlon Jensen was church historian and making the rounds. And I met with him once for a very long lunch, and then I had communications with him afterwards. And then other people shared with me their communications with Marlon Jensen. And for those who don't know, Marlon Jensen more than anyone else is responsible for the Gospel topics essays being released. Marlon Jensen for decades was like the church's key guy to help swoop in like Batman and help resolve people's faith crisis issues. And, you know, an example is that of that was when he and Richard Turley were called to Sweden to help try and, and, you know, resolve the Swedish rescue where Hans Mattson and a bunch of Swedes were losing their faith in the church and leaving. And the upshot from, from Marlon Jensen's time at resolving people's faith and doubts was, and I've got this directly from Marlon, once somebody loses their faith because of history or Truth claims or science or social justice kind of issues. They almost never come back. There's this podcast that's quite popular. I think it's called the Comeback Podcast that shows people who left the church and came back. Have you heard of it? I've never watched what I've heard about it.

Meggan Hayes: No, I've heard of it. And my general consensus of it is that they didn't leave the church, they just stopped going.

John Dehlin: Yes. And I call those people Jack Mormons. It's people that just lose interest for a time, or they. Or they actually literally do fit that stereotype of falling into sin and they leave, but they never deconstructed their belief. They never learned about polyandry and Peepstones or. Or misogyny or racism and came to care about those issues or cared about science or cared about truth. It was just like, it's not working for me. Or, oh, I. I fell in love, or, oh, I got addicted or whatever, and. And they were Jack Mormons, but they never processed intellectually and emotionally, their Mormonism. So when they came back, it's literally like, I got sober and I came back, or, you know, my life went in the toilet when I left the church. And so I came back because at least in the church, my life didn't go in the toilet. But. But Scott, if Scott's saying what. What Marlon Jensen and others have told me or others directly, which is once you lose your faith over intellectual or social justice issues or abuse issues, it's almost never that you come back, or at least never come back as an orthodox believer.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah.

John Dehlin: Yeah.

Meggan Hayes: Yep. And he said it right out loud.

John Dehlin: Yeah. Yeah. Well, that's great. And thanks for saying the quiet thing out loud, Scott Gordon. All right, next clip. Should I just play it?

Meggan Hayes: Yes, go for it.

John Dehlin: Okay.

Guest 2: Attacks on our history and our character have increased. Great effort has gone into trying to show the church is dishonest in our portrayal of history. One foundational reading source frequently recommended by critics is the 1945 book, no Man Knows My History, written by Fawn Brody. Now, I'm sure you're thinking that book is too old. Nobody uses it anymore. But you will find snippets of her arguments strewn across the Internet. This book is promoted by several prominent podcasts, websites, and message boards that promote leaving the church. One popular podcaster just made an audiobook reading of this book. Plus, if you go to any Barnes and Noble bookstore today, you will find this book is highly recommended. Here is a picture of the religion section in my bookstore in Redding, California, where it has long been a prominent book and a bestseller for as long as I can remember. And here is a picture of the bookstore, the religion section in the American Fork, Utah, Barnes and Noble. You will notice that there's a recommendation card from the American Fork Barnes and Noble staff. Brody approached her subject with dated and now widely rejected psychological theories. She started with the predetermined conclusion that Joseph Smith was a fraud. She relied heavily on hostile sources, made factual errors, including quoting fabricated stories that are still repeated today. Brody writes with obvious literary skill, but even scholars who agree with her position acknowledge her personal bitterness and methodological weakness undermine the work.

John Dehlin: Oh, my gosh. Go ahead. I've got so much to say, but I want you.

Meggan Hayes: I wanted to. I wanted to hear what you had to say about this one, because, number one, he mentioned you without mentioning you, which is something we already discussed because he basically says he who Must not be Named did a reading for an

John Dehlin: audiobook, I Am Mormon Voldemort.

Meggan Hayes: But I wanted to hear your take on this, especially after you just went through. How many episodes was it with John Turner?

John Dehlin: 40. I did 41 episodes on the Joseph Smith podcast with John Turner.

Meggan Hayes: Yes. And after all of John's research, he also had thoughts about Von Brody. So.

Guest: Yeah.

John Dehlin: Okay. Well, we've already made the point about, you know, he basically says. He starts by saying critics of the church are attacking the church's honesty and character. And we've already made that point. I think it's because the church has been dishonest and about how it's portrayed, its history and truth claims. So it's fair game. And it's just weird he can't acknowledge that as far as Brody goes. So I'll say a couple things. The first thing is Richard Bushman himself when he was writing Rough Stone, Rolling Bacon. Pop quiz. Who the most cited source for Richard Bushman, former stake president, former church patriarch, top faithful spokesperson for the Mormon Church for Joseph Smith in his book Rough Stone Rolling. As far as you know, who is Bushman's number one most often quoted source?

Meggan Hayes: Fawn Brody.

John Dehlin: Fawn McKay Brody. Right. And I'll add, and I told you this, I think in text, I remember vaguely Bushman saying that he felt like Brody, liked Joseph Smith and was actually kind to Joseph Smith. Now I want to go back and search and find, but that's what my memory says, so I want to start there.

Guest 2: So.

John Dehlin: So that's. There's that, you know, he. He attacks Brody for saying, number one, outdated theories. You know, the most credible criticism I've heard of Fawn Brody is that she took a lot of Freudian psychodynamic theories and tried to apply them to Joseph Smith. And on the one hand, Freudian psychodynamic stuff has fallen out of favor in a lot of ways in psychology. On the other hand, there's value in the sort of like the Jungian archetypes that are sometimes reflected in Freud. And I wouldn't say Freud's views are worthless. But more importantly, I actually give credit to Fawn Brody for not only trying to do history, but for trying to do a psychological analysis of Joseph Smith. I think we need more of that, not less. Because what does it value any of us to trash on Joseph Smith or even modern church leaders and just say they're all evil and mean and bad and, and bigots and racists and patriarchal people if we don't understand the human condition, why leaders act the way they act, why men act the way they act, why women act the way they act, why humans act the way they act. History is only valuable to the extent that it helps us understand ourselves better and then helps us act better in the future. So I don't fault Von Brody for trying to understand Joseph Smith, even if she did it with the best psychological tools she had at the time. So there's that. You know, it's weird that he accuses Brody of starting with a point of view. In his case, a critical or a non believing point of view. Right. Why are you laughing, Megan?

Meggan Hayes: Because they admit to doing that.

John Dehlin: That's all they are. Keep going. Sorry.

Meggan Hayes: No, that's it. They, they say they'll admit it out loud. We are going to start with the church is true. We're going to fit everything else into this paradigm. But so help me, if Brody doesn't like Joseph Smith and everything fits into that paradigm, she can't be trusted.

John Dehlin: And a secular historian isn't supposed to start with the belief that Joseph Smith is a prophet. And frankly, that's what makes Richard Bushman's book a slogan, you know, and so hard to get through is because he's constantly trying to say hard things but in a faithful context. And that's not what I want for my historians. I don't want them to have an ax to grind and I don't want them to be apologetic. And that's why I think that Brody did a great job. But I think what really is the news story here is that John Turner's book, and this is like almost personal blasphemy. I would have, if you would have asked Me a year ago. Will you ever depart from the point of view that Von Brody wrote the best biography ever on Joseph Smith? I would have told you probably not. But now that I've deeply read both books and I did record an audiobook of Fawn Brody's no Man Knows My History, that was released about a month ago, I'm going to be doing a series on it soon. So you can either buy it on Audible or you can wait and I'm going to tell you how to get it for cheap and then you can all be a part of this amazing series that I'm building in my mind around Fawn Brody and Joseph Smith. But so I did read Fawn Brody deeply and I read John Turner's book deeply. And I would say now if I had to recommend one book about Joseph Smith, it would be John Turner's book. And that's no disrespect to Dan Vogel, by the way, but I think John had the most access to the most sources. He had the freaking Clayton journals. Right? But he had way more sources than Brody ever had. And he'll admit that. But also he's just. Brody writes in such a dense intellectual, academic, even poetically intellectual style that it's often hard to understand what she's saying. Part of what I think Turner's gift is, is in speaking plainly, but in a way that's very compelling and interesting.

Meggan Hayes: Nephi would be so proud.

John Dehlin: What do you mean by that?

Meggan Hayes: The plain and precious truth.

John Dehlin: Yeah, yeah, I think, I think Turner gets more to the plain and precious truths. He's got better word economy than Brody does. But Brody's brilliant. And so another thing is, I just, I told you this in text. I reject number one that she relied just on hostile sources. I mean that's a trope forever. Like you can't trust the hurlbut affidavits or Mormonism unveiled or whatever because they were critical. But fair would only just trust the faithful sources and not want to trust the critical ones. And Brody just did her best to trust the faithful and the non faithful ones and I think that's, that's she does a way better job at balancing her sources than fair Mormon ever, ever could. And then, you know, the, the thing that I texted you most of all is he accuses her of bitterness. I do not detect a bitter bone in Fawn Brody's body. I think she's a credible academic who was who Bushman says care seem to like Joseph Smith and to be kind to him. And I, I think you could even Say she was generous with Joseph Smith, even though she clearly thought he was a sexual predator on some level and was a fraud on many levels. I think that's what the history plainly shows. How do you argue he wasn't a sexual predator? And how do you argue he wasn't a fraud? But given that I think she's very, very generous with Joseph Smith.

Meggan Hayes: Is there a book about Fawn Brody?

John Dehlin: Yes.

Guest 2: Yes.

John Dehlin: Noel Bringhurst. I did an episode on Mormon stories with Noel Bringhurst, who wrote a biography of Fawn Brody. And I recommend that everybody go back and listen to that episode and. Or read Newell Bringhurst's book. But I just think this is a hit smear job on Fawn Brody that she doesn't deserve. But I expect nothing less from Scott Gordon. But I will say, if you want to read one book on Joseph Smith, as much as it feels blasphemous to say it, read Turner's book, but also read Brody's book because it's brilliant. And while you're at it, read Dan Vogel and Grant Palmer and Bushman as well. Anyway, you. You. You probably regret asking me about Brody.

Meggan Hayes: I don't.

John Dehlin: I'm gonna have a few opinions about

Meggan Hayes: her, and that's what I wanted. Plus, I need to go back. I've already listened to that episode with Neil Bringhurst, but I obviously need to listen to it again.

John Dehlin: Okay. Well, Julia and Brooklyn can add that in the show notes anyway. Anything else you want to say about that?

Meggan Hayes: Well, the one thing that came up for me when you were talking was one of the hardest things for me after leaving the church. And, you know, I. I was very angry when I first got out, which is common for a lot of people. And the more I deconstruct, the more I've had to learn and lean into being able to say nice things about people who have harmed me, you know, or systems that have harmed me. You know, the. The church as a system and certain people in it still do really nice things, still do really good things, still feed hungry people. And. And there is a tendency, I think, in all of us to just say, this person harmed me. So they are terrible and they're all bad. And I'm going to point out the 17 news stories this week that prove my point. And I'm just going to not talk about any of the others. And I. I still have to work on it every day to be able to say this person is still a member and they are doing these things that are harming me. And they also have these really good qualities. Which I think is possibly something that maybe was lacking in this tear down of FOM Brody.

John Dehlin: Yeah, we are getting. Thank you for that, Megan. We are getting amazing comments from our viewership, so I'm just going to share a bunch. Jabala writes, Megan is moving up the leaderboard. I agree, she's amazing. Jabala also writes Voldemort. That's his nickname for me. Voldemort. Should that stick.

Meggan Hayes: I'm just gonna write it down.

John Dehlin: Somebody grab voldemort.com because I don't have time to do it right now. That's a great meme. One of my favorite commenters of all time, the Grand Scuba. He's brilliant. Every word he writes. Everyone should read and enjoy. Greg Scuba, thank you for joining us today on the Mormon News podcast. I miss you and I'll have you on anytime and do anything you tell me to do. Just email me. He writes, if you say John de Lind three times at a fair conference, the ghost of Ezra Booth will manifest to spoil the refreshments so they no longer strengthen and nourish your body. Thank you. Grand Scuba Comment anytime. Julia. Always star any comment Grand Scuba makes. So I read it. Spencer Windis writes, John, I agree that there's utility in understanding the psychology of historical actors, and I wish you had discussed the role of disordered narcissism more in your recent Joseph Smith series. Let me just address that. Thank you. Spencer Windez. This is what I want to do next. I want to do a revamp. I have to do 10 episodes on Brigham Young with John Turner, but what I want to do after that is I want to reboot the Joseph Smith podcast series. This time do it with Fawn Brody's book as the text instead of John Turner's book. And instead of inviting historians on, I want to invite psychologists and mental health experts on like Natasha Helper, Julie Hanks, Janice Spengler and other smart mental health professionals and the like, not to discuss Joseph Smith from a historian's point of view, but from a mental health provider's point of view and to talk about Emma from a mental health point of view and Joseph's family and the church and social psychology and mental health disorders and that sort of perspective. A totally different take on Joseph Smith's life that we've never done. And what a better text to do that with and to take advantage of the audiobook that's brand new than to do that with no Man Knows My History. What do you think, Megan?

Meggan Hayes: Oh, that sounds amazing. Right up my alley. Because as much As I love the history and learning about the history, I like the why of the history more. That fascinates me more.

John Dehlin: Of course, it's more important. Yeah, yeah. What's the value of history if it's not for us to live better lives? Jujun Yarna writes. Can you do an audio of Mormon Enigma? No, I think a woman, you know, I felt bad, I felt bad narrating no man Knows My History from the standpoint of it being written by a woman, and yet I'm narrating it and the only thing I'll say is they asked me. And so I did it because I wanted it done. And I felt like maybe my name associated with it could help sell more copies and that would be good for Fawn Brody's book. But the only other two reasons why I felt okay having a man voice no man knows my history is because it's about a man. I mean, no man knows my history is about Joseph Smith and he's a man and he's quoted all the time. And so I, I think, thought it's fair to have a man narrating Joseph Smith specifically. And who better to do that than Voldemor, Right? And then secondly, I, I, I guess I, well, I, I forget what my second point was going to be. I'm sure I'll, I'll think of it. But as far as Mormon Enigma goes, that's about a woman, that's written by women, that's about a woman. And, and I would only want that to be narrated and voiced by a woman.

Meggan Hayes: Yep, I think it would be well done that way. I've read that book and it was amazing.

John Dehlin: Yeah, it's, it's a, it's a critical, it's a critical read. Same with, same with In Sacred Loneliness by, by Compton. I think I would only want that narrated by a woman. I would turn, I would probably, I would turn down an invitation to narrate Mormon Enigma for whatever that's worth. But I don't feel bad that a man narrated no Man Knows My History, even though I deeply respect women in Fon Brody really quickly, Ryan Scott writes, Turner's book was a very informative and easy read. I agree. Grand Scuba writes Mormon Enigma is my favorite perspective on Joseph Smith. Emma's story is so illuminating. That's a brilliant point of view. Megan, maybe you should audio narrate Mormon Enigma.

Meggan Hayes: I do have people tell me at least once a week, sometimes daily that I should read books for them.

John Dehlin: So as an audio reader. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, we can talk to Signature books or whoever and see how we make stuff like that happen. Maybe the Saint Tellius writes, john needs to do an audiobook as a side hustle. It's not great money. Like, I make way more money what I do than that audiobook was a book of love. The amount of money I stand to make is nothing. And it was a, it was a money loss for me, not a money gain. In terms of how I could have spent my time, I think I. I think I calculated five bucks an hour. It was horrendous, but I'm so glad I did it. Tanner Plummer writes, listening to no man knows My History book now. Thank you, John Brody. Chuck KV writes, brody had some mistakes, but she was way ahead of her time and still has some excellent critiques that firmly stand. She was the first. Applying historical methods is why I would say over 80% of her analysis and points stand. If you read the CES letter or the Gospel topics essays or the, you know, LDS discussion series, Fawn Brody nailed 85 to 90% of that in 1945 without all the, all the sources that the rest of us have. She's a genius. One quick super chat material writes, love how much you do for the people in this space, John. And I'm going to add Megan. Okay, I'm sorry that I'm not. I'm going to stop apologizing. Let's keep going. Megan. All right, let's go to the next clip. Do you want to say anything about this next clip?

Meggan Hayes: Nope. Let's just dive in.

John Dehlin: Okay. All right, let's dive into the next clip.

Guest 2: I have often been puzzled by the lack of accuracy in anti Mormon sources. It isn't just Fawn Brody. The same lack of accuracy shows up in other sources as well. A few years ago, the former Latter Day Saint community started passing around what some claimed was the Holy Grail of anti Mormon books. A man named Jeremy Runnels compiled a list of questions in a book called the CES Letter and was very successful in marketing the book all over the world. That book drew many people out of the church and many former believers used it as a missionary track to show their families why they left and why their family members should leave, too.

John Dehlin: All right, so he takes a swipe at the CES Letter. Jeremy Runnels. What did you want to say about that?

Meggan Hayes: Well, I just wanted you to know you're not alone. No, he just. He's going down the line of these sources that are threatening his worldview and the worldview of the people. He's talking to. And so, yeah, he has to line it up. He does give one source where he says Jeremy was wrong, and he gives a source where he says the Fon Brody was wrong. And it's interesting to me that he can just only find a few. I mean, maybe he found more and he only had time to throw out one. But his critiques do seem pretty narrow considering the wealth of information that both Von Brody and Jeremy Runnels present.

John Dehlin: Yeah, thank you for that, Megan. And I'll just add two things. Number one is whether it's the lawsuit against me or being mentioned at a fair conference for those who are trying to promote informed consent and to reduce the harm at the church, you know you've made it. You know you've been successful. You know you've been effective once you're being mentioned by name at the fair LDS conference. So I, you know, I can see why they don't want to give me the credit by. By naming me. I can see why they want to avoid it, if for no other reason alone. That what it does is it basically says people like Jeremy and I have been effective or Alyssa Grenfell. And so I don't know that they realize that whenever they name us, they're basically complimenting us because, you know, like I often say, being excommunicated for apostasy in the past two decades. Sam Young, Natasha Helfer, Jeremy Runnels, Nemo, the Mormon, whoever, Brett Metcalf, the September 6th. What it means is, is you're on the right side of history, right? It means you stood for women, stood for LGBT people, stood for truthful history, stood for science. That's what being excommunicated for or stood for helping disaffected people heal and grow afterwards. So it's an honor to be excommunicated for apostasy in the past 20 years, and it's an honor to be called out in a negative way by the fair conference. So I don't think the insults are doing what he thinks they're doing. But secondly, I just think they don't. They just don't get the Streisand effect. They don't realize that. That when they mention me or Jeremy or the CES letter or Eliza Grunfeld or in the church sues me. What they're doing is they're just promoting us. They're just making it so people learn about us and check out our stuff and then ultimately are persuaded by it. Because clearly, clearly, if history show anything, who's more persuasive, Fair Mormon Or Alyssa Grenfell, Jeremy Runnels, John De Lynn, Megan Hayes, Bill Real, you know, Nemo the Mormon. Who's more effective, who's more persuasive. Right.

Meggan Hayes: Well, and it's because we're not even trying to be persuasive. We're just presenting the truth and letting people decide and guess what people want to decide.

John Dehlin: Yes. Amen, Megan. Amen. Amen. Megan, my prayer for you is that your name eclipses all of ours someday at fair lds.

Meggan Hayes: Well, if I get mentioned on that stage, you know I'm going to be listening.

John Dehlin: And I would say my prayer for you is that you also get sued by the Mormon Church. But I don't wish that on anyone.

Meggan Hayes: No, I'd need some real backup singers if that happened.

John Dehlin: All right, well, that's. I think that's enough on that clip. But, but shout out to Jeremy Runnels. You're a legend. Your work isn't perfect. But also, I'll stand up for Jeremy Runnels accuracy and honesty any day of the week over Fair Mormon or the LDS Church any day of the week.

Meggan Hayes: Well, and I've heard you say so many times, we're going to keep doing podcasts about the CES letter as long as they keep bashing it. And so you got to do more, John, because they're still bringing it up.

John Dehlin: I'm going to say this again. You know, the day that, that all of the ex Mormon podcasts go away. Megan. Mormon Church, this is. Make this a short, Julia. Okay, Mormon Church. Fair Mormon, I want to give you the secret of making all ex Mormon influencers go away overnight. Be a hundred percent honest in your depiction of history. Be science based in all of the things you talk about, and stop doing harm to women and stop being racist, stop and stop being lgbt, antagonistic, and, you know, be. Be honest and kind in all of your doings. And as soon as you do that and as soon as you share that sort of communication broadly with the membership, the ex Mormon Internet will die overnight. Am I wrong, Megan?

Meggan Hayes: No, because we wouldn't have anything that we needed to talk about.

John Dehlin: What do we talk about?

Meggan Hayes: We would. We would just applaud them. Thank you. Finally. Now I'm going to do something else with my life.

John Dehlin: Yeah. Because, I mean, I can think of a lot of things that I'd rather be doing in terms of, like, what would be just inherently enjoy. Enjoyable for me.

Meggan Hayes: Well, and possibly less dangerous, if not physically, but emotionally, you know, more financially

John Dehlin: lucrative, less dangerous, less stressful, less complicated for me and my Family. I could. I worked at Microsoft. I worked at MIT. Think about it. I have a PhD in psychology. I could do a few other things right.

Meggan Hayes: Yes, absolutely.

John Dehlin: I do this because it's where I feel like I can do the most good for humanity right now. But fair Mormon and Mormon Church. You now have the secret to making us all go away.

Meggan Hayes: Yep. It's not a lawsuit.

Guest 2: That just.

John Dehlin: That just makes your. That just. It makes it worse for you anyway. Yeah. Yeah.

Guest 3: All right.

John Dehlin: Should we play the next clip?

Meggan Hayes: Yep, go for it.

John Dehlin: People are accusing me of being caffeinated. I don't know why they would be accusing me of that.

Meggan Hayes: Why aren't they accusing me? I got my coffee right here.

John Dehlin: Because you're.

Guest 2: But you're.

John Dehlin: You're either less animated or more controlled. Which is it, Megan?

Meggan Hayes: A little more controlled.

John Dehlin: Oh, then I feel. I feel empathy for your insides.

Meggan Hayes: But just here, you know, Donnie and I go on walks in the morning. We say, everything.

John Dehlin: All right, let's play the next clip.

Guest 2: Be wary of criticizing the Lord's church. Don't criticize the Brethren because they may be doing something for a purpose you can't see or don't understand. There will be times when we do not fully understand a decision, a policy, or even a fellow ward member's perspective. In those moments, we must trust the Lord, seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost, and remember that unity in Christ is more important than winning an argument. The controversies get repackaged, the tactics get recycled, but the answer remains the same. Faith in Jesus Christ, loyalty to his restored gospel and the united voices of the apostles, and love for one another.

John Dehlin: Holy moly. There's so much there. Go ahead, Megan.

Meggan Hayes: I know that's how he ends. His opening address is. I have said all of these things that might be a little sticky. I've brought up Von Brody. I've talked about the CES letter. I talked about common debates that we get into, but you don't really need to look at any of that. Just do exactly what the Brethren tell you. Turn off your brain, compartmentalize whatever it is you need to do, and you'll be just fine. And at the beginning of that, he mentions the Brethren first as the person, the people that you should follow, and then Christ takes a second somewhere down the line.

John Dehlin: Oh, my gosh. I love your analysis, Megan. And our listeners and viewers love your analysis. I'll add to that and just say number one. I thought it was interesting that that clip starts with a picture of Kristofferson, because, like, the most problematic thing I've Learned this past 12 months is not the lawsuit against me. It's that the member of the First Presidency, Christofferson, who I tend to like, and I like his brother, Tom Kristofferson. He's a dear friend, right. That this apostle and First Presidency member that I like like, probably got his pedophile brother rebaptized within a year, got his record respunged, eventually got him into a bishopric, got him and did not warn the membership or his own family that there was a predator in their midst, leading to more child abuse. And. And what Scott Gordon is saying, without saying it, is trust D. Todd Christofferson that when he was protecting his pedophile brother Wade, that there's something more sophisticated and spiritual and wise about that than any of us, any of you caveman Mormons who are faithful could ever understand with your caveman brains. You know what I mean, right?

Meggan Hayes: It's not that simple, John. You just don't understand why protecting the predator was the right thing to do do and what God wanted.

John Dehlin: Please, please, Christopher, Sid or Gordon, explain to me why the wisdom in D. Todd Christofferson's expunging of Wade's pedophile record so that he could abuse more people. Please explain to me. Explain to me the spirituality or the sophistication of that decision.

Meggan Hayes: Right? Oh, and how does Christopherson make that work in his own mind?

John Dehlin: Yeah.

Meggan Hayes: Oh, yeah. And then Scott's there to just say, look to the. Look away from all of that, and there's this beautiful painting of the Savior and I'm going to use my soft voice and hypnotize you all back into the church. Is true. And something else I noticed about this conference versus Sunstone that I just went to is they start with prayers and they end their talks. A lot of them, in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen. Like they would at a sacrament meeting.

John Dehlin: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I'll just add again that if you look at the basic cult techniques of what a cult is, it's that you can't criticize or disagree with the leadership. So he's literally promoting a cult like mentality when he says, don't criticize the brethren, which you can't fault him for because Dallin H. Oaks himself has said publicly it's wrong to criticize the brethren, even if the criticism's true. But it is culty. And nobody can disagree that that's culty. I. I don't. I don't care. It's my marriage, my kids, as a father, as a boss. Shoot me the day I say, you

Meggan Hayes: can't criticize me because at what point is there something that needs to be criticized? If it's not the rampant abuse, what is it? What is their line? When somebody needs to stand up and say, this is not okay, they don't have one. Which means they could commit the worst atrocities. And we're all just supposed to sit back and be like, but God, it's dangerous. It's dangerous. And so far we haven't gone into the realm of it becoming something that people are getting so upset about that stopped them from doing that, which I don't know why child abuse isn't that thing. But yeah, they, they could do some really terrible things and feel like God is on their side and the members would be expected to sit back and allow it to happen.

John Dehlin: Yeah, yeah. Let me amend what I just said. Don't shoot me, no matter what. I don't want to be shot. But, but I, I, if I, if there ever reaches the day, you know, I may not like all criticism, I may not share all criticism or even allowed on my platform for various reasons, including sometimes it's dishonest or smearing or, or not fair. But anybody that says I'm above criticism or the leaders are above criticism, that's a tell, That's a tell that you're in a cult. I hope. I'm never caught saying that to anyone. It's super culty.

Meggan Hayes: And the fellow that you interviewed recently who was a, who is, is a therapist and then he left the church. I can't remember his name, but I was listening to it this morning. He said, if we don't fail, and we don't fail openly, then we don't live our lives. I mean that, that was a big portion of his thing is like we have to fail. We have to be uncomfortable. And if they're sitting up there and there's no way for anybody to make them uncomfortable, how do things get better?

John Dehlin: Exactly. Yeah. If members just assume that whatever the brethren are doing they do for a good reason, then that says don't give feedback. And if members don't give feedback, then how does the church ever have a mechanism for self improvement? Like, no, you want people saying, hey, this might be a better decision and it could save the brethren from a lot of, of harm. The only other thing I'll just add, he's, you know, Scott Gordon says unity is better than winning an argument. Then why does fair Mormon exist? You know what I mean? Like, it's, it's weird because they don't engender unity. They're divisive, they're polarizing. And some could argue that we're polarizing. All I can say is I don't want to be polarizing. My goal is not to polarize. And there's a lot that I could do to be a lot more polarizing that I intentionally don't do. But I just, I don't think Scott Gordon and Fair follows this council of valuing unity over. Over winning an argument or being polarizing. So I think he's being hypocritical there and tone deaf. And, and I, you know, he says the three most important things are faith, loyalty, and love for one another. I would say truth is also important, and also not doing harm is also important. So faith is only as good as it's based on truth and also not harming other people. And then loyalty is good unless it's dangerously loyal to an institution that's lying and harming people. So you want to be careful who you're loyal to. And yes, love for another, I think we can all agree, is what we should be driven by. So amen to that. One another. I think we all agree on that.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah. Because what. What is unity? That. He doesn't want unity. He wants homogeneous. He wants a homogeneous group where everyone thinks and acts and talks the same. That's not unity. Unity is being together despite there being differences, not. Not the lack of difference. So when he says unity, he doesn't mean unity, I don't think.

John Dehlin: I mean, it's a balance, right? You want enough agreement in a group to where the group can work together towards a common goal with. With a relative amount of efficiency. Like, you know, oftentimes I'm accused of being too liberal or, you know, whatever. Like, I think one thing that liberal groups have to always watch out for is there's so much dissent, so much individuality, that sometimes it's impossible to get anything done. There's not enough group cohesion to actually accomplish stuff. Whereas conservatives, they. They tend to value loyalty. This is all Jonathan Heights thinking from the Righteous Mind book. Conservatives tend to value authority and unity more, and sometimes that just makes conservatives more effective and efficient than liberals. So it's a balance, right?

Meggan Hayes: Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. You got me thinking. I'm going to be ruminating on that for a while.

John Dehlin: Yeah, well, you got me thinking, Megan. All right, what's the next slide?

Meggan Hayes: Okay, so this just is a little buffer between. Now we're just going to do two other clips from two different presenters that are going to give us a little flavor of some other things that happen. But it won't be as in depth as when we were listening to Scott because I went through his whole speech and pulled out a big portion. So, yeah, this next one, we should

John Dehlin: spend the next year responding to fair Mormon talks from this conference. Probably.

Meggan Hayes: I agree. I agree.

John Dehlin: Or new series responding to apologists. A new series on LDS on on Mormon Stories podcast. Okay, so let's go with the first clip.

Meggan Hayes: Yep.

Guest: In my humble opinion, Joseph Smith and treasure hunting is actually. Is a thorny historical issue. And so. So I wasn't surprised they asked me to talk about it. And they asked me to cover all the major issues in 25 minutes, which is impossible of various kinds. This is actually more what village diviners do is find stuff that's lost or supposedly stolen. And buried treasure is like a subcategory of lost items that people are looking for. And we have accounts of Joseph Smith Sr. And Joseph Smith Jr. Helping people find stuff successfully. This is an interesting article from 1994 by Dan Vogel on the locations of Joseph Smith's early treasure quest. So he comes up with documentation for 18 different treasure digs. Now, he doesn't evaluate the reliability of the documentation. Some of those digs probably never happened. And yet, you know, there's probably some digs that were never documented. So we really just don't know. I'd say maybe there were about a dozen or so digs, but that's just a guess. We actually don't know. So if you're reading something that's talking about the Smiths making a magic circle and cutting the throat of a sheep or whatever, if the author's not talking about that tentatively, then, you know, you're not reading careful history. Smith and Cowdery at this time, looking back, Smith helped Cowdery on this. Smith and Cowdery this time, looking back, they're saying, okay, he was young, he was foolish, but he wasn't trained in the classical creedal of Christianity. This treasure seeking environment is actually probably better to help him have the restoration than having been trained in the Yale Divinity School.

John Dehlin: Oh, my gosh, Megan, what you just did there, you just took like nuggets of really fascinating stuff from an entire presentation and put them all in one clip. I'm dying. What's your analysis? I'm dying to hear.

Meggan Hayes: Oh, man, there was a lot there. So he, he starts out by saying treasure digging is thorny. He gives that little. I'm going to admit that just really quickly at the beginning. Then he. I wanted to hear your take on The Joseph Smith and Joseph Smith Senior were successful in helping people find stuff because I don't remember there ever being a success story. He just says that he didn't give any proof. Even if you listen to the whole talk, he's not going to give any proof that that statement is true.

John Dehlin: I mean, I wonder if he's talking about, like, finding water like a well, because, I mean, he was trying to put treasure digging as a subset of the finding things sort of skill set. And I know that water. Water witching, you know, was one major thing. Or, you know, I found a story of my great grandparents where they lost, like, a cow or a sheep or a goat. And they. And this is in Idaho in the late 1800s, and they end up going to a man in the. In the town. I think this is in Preston, Idaho, or Ogden area, one of the two. But my great grandpa is looking for a cow or a goat or a sheep they lost. There's a man in town who's Mormon who has a seer stone, and he says, help me find my cow. And then he has a. Not only does he help the man find a cow, but while they're looking in the seer stone, my great grandpa gets a vision that he's gonna marry these twins, and they end up being related to Elizabeth Smart. It's a whole story, but it's how the seer stone not only helps the man find his cow, but the seer stone ends up being how he convinces his wife to let him take two sisters as plural wives, the Smart sisters. Anyway, I wonder if that's what they mean, is like finding cows, finding horses, finding water. And of course, is the stone really helping them find a cow or water? You know what I'm saying? Yeah, maybe that's what he means.

Meggan Hayes: I don't know, because he didn't pontificate about that part at all. So then he says Dan Vogel is not good at checking his sources, which I'm sure.

John Dehlin: Make a clip of this. Say it again, Megan. Fair Mormon accuses who of what?

Meggan Hayes: Dan Vogel. Of not being careful about his sources.

John Dehlin: Pot, kettle, a little bit. Is there a better individual source checker about Joseph Smith in all of Mormonism?

Meggan Hayes: I don't think so. Dan Vogel is in the chats of every podcast that's talking about Joseph Smith throwing out truth gems.

John Dehlin: He is the man. It's not Richard Bushman world. It's not even John Turner. The authority in the world on primary sources about Joseph Smith, in my opinion, is Dan Vogel. Maybe it's some nameless or historian that Joseph Smith Papers project. I mean, maybe it's Robin Jensen, I don't know. But in terms of public scholars who competes with Dan Bogle for primary sources, like, that's just. I almost want to punch the guy. And I don't believe in violence, so that's just an emotional reaction. I want to punch his rhetorical self for what is such a inaccurate jab. And he's a nice guy. And I'm not encouraging violence. I'm talking about feeling strongly about how much I respect Dan Bogle and how much he should be spoken about with respect, in my opinion.

Speaker F: Yes.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah, yeah. I mean, I knew there would be a reaction to that comment. And then he says that anyone who is saying that they were, you know, cutting a sheep as part of their ritual is not really looking at it in the right way. I mean, I don't know why he's so opposed to that being part of it. I mean, there was a lot of ritual that went into these treasure digs and finding things.

John Dehlin: I mean, yeah, he didn't. I didn't get to hear the full talk. So I don't know what sources he's citing, but it seems like what he's saying is ex Mormon critics or critics like to include sheep throat slitting as a part of the treasure digs. Joseph Smith went on, and I have read that many, many times, so I'm surprised he's casting doubt on that. But it sounds like what he's saying is the accounts that include sheep throat slitting with Joseph Smith treasure digs can't be fully trusted. And to be fair, I don't know enough to know that to respond to that.

Guest 2: Right.

Meggan Hayes: Where's Dan Bogle when we need him?

John Dehlin: Yeah, yeah, yeah. So, Dan Bogle, here's an opportunity to show who's more accurate. You or is it John Ashurst McGee? What's his name?

Meggan Hayes: It's on there.

Speaker G: Yeah.

Meggan Hayes: John.

Guest 2: Mark. Mark.

John Dehlin: Mark Ashurst McGee. Yeah. Viewers and listeners, please comment now or later in the chat or in the comments about whether or not we can safely tie sheep throat cutting to actual digs. Joseph Smith went on. I think that's a. A fun and interesting question. Maybe we should do an entire LDS discussions episode just on that.

Meggan Hayes: Absolutely, yeah. And then his triumphant statement, his magnum opus at the end of this speech is that treasure digging was the best preparation Joseph Smith could have had. Could have had to put him in a position to have a vision and restore God's one true church on the earth.

John Dehlin: Well, just as someone who's old I have one thing to say about that, and that's not his original thought. I learned that first from Richard Bushman, and it wasn't from rough stone rolling. Richard Bushman had a book about Joseph Smith before Rustone rolling called Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Early Mormonism, which he wrote, I think, as I understand it, as requested by Leonard Arrington. But it just covers Joseph Smith's family background in his early years, even before he started the church. And that was Richard Bushman's conclusion in that book that maybe God, it was just him speculating, maybe treasure digging was the way, and peep stoning and searing was the way God helped Joseph practice his later, more mature prophetic skills. And I just think that's weird that God's going to use dark folk magic skills as a way to train his prophet. But if that's true, why hasn't he done that with Brigham Young and John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff and Lorenzo Snow? Why isn't Russell and Nelson down a jokes using seer stones now to guide the church? And, you know, and why isn't God training his prophet seers and revelators now to use folk magic to help them become good prophet seers and revelators? Anyway, I think that's a silly argument and it's not even original.

Meggan Hayes: Right. No, I just, I. When he said it, because he went through his whole speech, that was his defining moment, was that statement. And I did chuckle a bit.

John Dehlin: Yeah.

Meggan Hayes: But yes, the church has the seer stone. Right. Or a seer stone. Or more than one even, I think.

John Dehlin: Yeah, they do.

Meggan Hayes: Why aren't they using them? Why are they in a vault instead of in Dallin's office, ready to go? Why aren't they next to his, you know, why weren't they on top of Russell's legal pad next to his bedside table?

John Dehlin: You know, I think an apologist would say, how do you know? How do you know Oakes isn't using a seer stone? Maybe he is.

Meggan Hayes: I hope he is.

John Dehlin: All right. What a great clip. Wow. I can see that that's the talk we need to get into in and of itself.

Meggan Hayes: Yep.

John Dehlin: For another day.

Guest 2: All right.

John Dehlin: What's. And should I just play the next clip or do you want to introduce it?

Meggan Hayes: Nope, let's just play it.

John Dehlin: All right, Next clip. This is great, great, great work, Megan.

Meggan Hayes: Thank you.

Guest 3: The Book of Mormon is the central aspect to what Latter Day Saints believe. And so it always, from the beginning, begs the question of, you know, how precisely did this happen? And really, let me get I should start off. You know, the worst way to start a presentation is to tell you the answer from the beginning. And that is, we don't really know. That's because it's a miracle. And I can no more describe to you exactly the way that the prophet, seer, and revelator Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon than I can tell you precisely how it is the molecules under Jesus's feet in the water held him up as he walked across it. Miracles, by their definition, are beyond explanation. That's the reason why we believe them. We believe in miracles because they can't happen any other way than by the power of God. And so the most important part when you're studying this or any of the miracles of the restoration is to stop first and realize that what you're talking about is a miracle. So we can. We can talk about what sources people have left behind. We can explain what it is that people have said about that miracle. But in the end, the most important thing to remember is that it is a miracle. The early accounts of the translation of the Book of Mormon, the idea that words were appearing on a stone was not an embarrassment. It was the evidence that this really was from God. Because anyone can dictate a book. You might quibble about whether or not anyone can dictate something as amazing as the Book of Mormon, but people dictate

John Dehlin: books all the time.

Guest 3: But not anyone can make words appear on a stone that is obviously coming from a supernatural power. So they see the fact.

John Dehlin: Holy moly. Megan,

Meggan Hayes: I'm so sorry. Oh, I can't help but just.

John Dehlin: Wow. Well, tell us, tell us why. Spell it out.

Meggan Hayes: Anybody can write a book. Anybody can dictate a book. But if you can. I can't even say it. If you can make words appear on a stone, that proves that it came from God.

Guest 3: That.

Meggan Hayes: That. John, why are you making me say it? Oh, that's. I just. He's standing up there with his Mormon garb on, you know, the shirt and the tie and his authority. And he's so sure about this. And so I don't, like. I don't want to mock him.

John Dehlin: That logic. Just spell it out for me. What's wrong with the logic that words appearing on a stone is evidence that. That God is behind the prospect? I mean, that. That actually on its face seems logical to me. If you are a prophet and words from God are appearing on a stone and you're dictating, then that book's from God. That actually feels logically consistent to me. What's Tell me why that's humorous or

Meggan Hayes: not true, Then why did they hide it? Why did they hide the stone? Why did they hide that Joseph put his face in a hat? Yes. Why did leaders for so many years allow these rogue artists to depict the translation process as Joseph sitting in front of the plates and dictating to someone? If the stone was the most amazing part, if the stone in the hat has always been the miracle of the Book of Mormon, why have we been embarrassed of it for so long?

John Dehlin: And I could say devil's advocate. The leaders lacked faith. They felt embarrassed. They cowered to the judgments of the world. And instead of boldly proclaiming Joseph's prophetic powers, they were afraid to be mocked and scorned. And they lacked faith. And so it was their own weakness. And God lets leaders make mistakes.

Meggan Hayes: Yeah. So what about all the other people that saw words on the stones, John?

John Dehlin: Who

Meggan Hayes: wasn't there? Someone who got excommunicated for also seeing

John Dehlin: words on a stone or at least reprimanded? Right?

Meggan Hayes: Yes.

John Dehlin: Yeah.

Meggan Hayes: So why, why is Joseph the only one that gets to have that gift if other people have it and they dictate books from a stone? I mean, I guess we have to believe them too. Or, I mean, once a stone is a miracle and the words on it, then I think the sky is kind of the limit.

John Dehlin: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, my, my response also, in adding to what you're saying now, flipping to. To your, to your side, so to speak, is that if, if, I mean, this is obvious, if Joseph Smith was dictating literally God's word, why were there so many grammatical errors? Why were there so many anachronisms? Why was there deutero, Isaiah? Why did it say horses? Why did it say steel? Why did it say, you know, dark skin is a curse from God? Why did it have a trinitarian God such that it needed to be changed later to, to. To showing God and Jesus being separate? Why did it change white and delights them to pure and delightsome? Why has the Book of Mormon been changed thousands of times? Why does it have so many anachronisms? Why does it have so many 19th century relics if God has the power to transcend all of that and communicate a perfect book? That's my question.

Meggan Hayes: Well, and why in heaven's name did they have to cart the plates around and drag them across the whole of the continent so that Joseph Smith could find them so then he could not use them, but he could just have a stone and a hat? Couldn't they just have forgotten all of that.

John Dehlin: Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. So, yeah, church leaders hit it because of the combination of all the problems with the text itself and all the changes with how kooky and supernatural it is. And by the way, it's also the fact, to answer your question, Megan, is that the stone and the hat were the exact instruments of his fraud with treasure digging. And it's folk magic and weird folk voodoo, you know, dark magic stuff. So why is God using weird voodoo, dark magic stuff for his holy enlightened purposes? You know what I mean?

Meggan Hayes: Yeah. Because the simplest answer is that Joseph Smith was digging for treasure and help and thought he was helping people find things. And then when it wasn't working out, he went the Ron Hubbard route and started a religion because then he could find things that people couldn't prove he didn't find.

John Dehlin: Yeah, the Book of Mormon was a pivot from failed and illegal treasure digging, and he just brought the instruments along with him of his failed, illegal folk magic, dark treasure digging garbage, and he just brought those instruments into the Book of Mormon. Why? Because a lot of his followers believed what he told them, which was the stone had power. Joseph convinced everyone, and maybe he believed it himself that the stone had power and that's why he used it with the Book of Mormon. But do any of us believe the stone had power?

Meggan Hayes: No, we don't, because otherwise it would still have power.

John Dehlin: Yeah, yeah.

Meggan Hayes: Unless it's like the plates and God had to take the power up to

John Dehlin: heaven because we don't have problems today that would warrant more power, right?

Guest: No, no, no, no.

John Dehlin: Everything's just in the world now, like child abuse. That could warrant extra help from God. Right? I'll say. I've never heard of this Jared Dermot before, but I wonder if we'll hear more from. From him in the future. The one point I wanted to make addition to the one you made is, you know, he's basically trying to frame the Book of Mormon translation as a miracle, like the molecules of water and Jesus walking. But when he, when he does that, in my view, it's a form of thought stopping. When he says, don't even try to figure out the translation of the Book of Mormon or how it came to be because it's a miracle. What he's basically saying is, is stop thinking about it. It's thought stopping, which is another cult technique, because the truth is, any smart person can figure out the main places where the Book of Mormon came from. I'll tell you, Joseph Smith's own biography, a lot of it came from the Bible. A lot of it came from Isaiah. A lot of it came from the gospels of the New Testament. A lot of it came from Jesus. A lot of it came from Protestant sermons and theology that was being debated. A lot of it came from the anti Masonic rhetoric of the day. And then a lot of it we learned from Thomas Murphy and the new book that he just came out with that we've had him on before. Native American lore probably influenced Joseph Smith. So if you add all that together and, and then you add the mound builder myth and the view of the Hebrews and, and that sort of influence, tell me if that doesn't account for 95% of where the Book of Mormon comes from.

Meggan Hayes: But it. So it's. They have to say it's a miracle. Well, and that's like I went to the Sunstone conference and then I just right after started listening to the fair conference. And one of the main differences I see is that at Sunstone people presented information that they found it was very source heavy. And I was left to make some decisions for myself and study further. When I listen to the Fair Conference, it feels like they're doing the offer the opposite. They're offering up a few little tidbits of sources, but they end every single speech that I've listened to thus far with, if that doesn't make sense to you, just stop looking, don't dig in more. It's a miracle. God wanted it. Listen to the brethren. Like you said, the thought stopping things, it didn't encourage me. I mean it encouraged me because I'm like, wow, I really have to dig into what these people said. But I don't think their talks were to push people to dig in more. It was to push them to dig in less.

John Dehlin: Yeah, that's why I call it thought stopping. And that's why it's noted by all cult experts as a technique. Because the cults use. Because if. What's the worst thing someone can do if the Book of Mormon has been framed as the keystone of our reli

Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.