Helen Mar Kimball, Wife of Joseph Smith

Categories: Uncategorized

There is a lot of controversy and misunderstanding surrounding Helen Mar Kimball, the 14-year-old that Joseph Smith polygamously married when he was 37. Anti-Mormons use the facts about Joseph’s relationship with her to attack his character. This article will summarize writings from FAIR Blog as well as from Mormon Scholar, Brian C. Hales, to shed light on this controversial chapter in Mormon history.

During Joseph’s lifetime, very few people actually knew about plural marriage, and Helen was no exception. When confronted about it by her father, Heber C. Kimball, her first impulse was anger. Later, after hearing her father out, she ” . . . knew that he loved me too well to teach me anything that was not strictly pure, virtuous, and exalting in its tendencies; and no one else could have influenced me at that time or brought me to accept of a doctrine so utterly repugnant and so contrary to all of our former ideas and traditions.” The next morning Joseph visited the Kimball household, explained to her that “If you will take this step [marriage], it will ensure your eternal salvation & exaltation and that of your father’s household and all of your kindred.”

Some use this story to ‘prove’ that Joseph was not only a manipulator, but a pedophile. For these claims to be true, we must examine the following questions:

  1. At the time and at Joseph’s age, was it normal to marry young teens?
  2. Was the relationship sexual in nature?
  3. Might Helen have been sexually mature?

Please note that not everything the anti-Mormons say is untrue, but we do need to separate the truth from the lies and look at the entire picture to understand the situation.

Was it Normal to Marry Teens in the 1840’s?

To answer this question, we turn to this FAIR article titled 19th Century Nuptiality and Propaganda II.

Teen Marriage Ages in the 1800's

The graph shows that in the 1840’s approximately 40% of all marriages were to brides ages 14 – 19, though only a small percentage of those were as young as 14.

1880 marriage ages

As you can see, 14-year-old marriages between 1840 and 1880 hovered right around 1%. Though rare, marrying a 14-year-old was not entirely unheard of. We must also examine who was marrying whom.

Helen Mar Kimball's Age Compared to Joseph Smith

It shows that men married between the age of 34 – 38 on average married women 10 years younger than themselves. Though it’s impossible to determine an exact number, we should be able to come up with an estimate. If 19% of 37-year-old men married teens and of those teen 2.62% were 14, we see that less than 1/2% of men Joseph’s age would have married a 14-year-old (Please note that this is a high estimate as the likelihood of the teen being 14 goes down as the man’s age goes up).

Based on this data we see that no, a 37-year-old marrying a 14-year-old was far from normal. The critics are correct in this point, but this is still just one part of the picture.

Was the Marriage Sexual?

Though Helen’s age on its own may seem damning, it’s only relevant if Joseph Smith and Helen actually had sex. For this question we turn to Brian C. Hales, a prominent LDS apologist and author who specializes in the topic of polygamy.

In an article titled Sexuality in Joseph Smith’s Plural Marriages, Brother Hales does provide evidence that Joseph had a sexual relationship with at least 9 of his 33 wives, but not necessarily all of them. He contends that a busy schedule as well as a vigilant, jealous wife would likely have kept him from participating in any sexual activity. He was always under Emma’s watchful eye. If his other wives and he were unaccounted for even for a few minutes, Emma was known to search the house as well the neighborhood.

Helen married Joseph about a year before the end of his life when he was incredibly busy and Emma was at her most jealous state, making opportunities for sexual encounters few and far between. Though lack of opportunity and lack of evidence don’t necessarily prove that the relationship wasn’t sexual, it’s not a sure thing either.

Is it a Problem if it was Sexual?

Even though it was rare and even if it was a sexual relationship, does that make it wrong? In another FAIR Blog article called Nuptiality and Propagana counters enemies of the Church who claim that Helen was a pre-pubescent victim. He cites the following statistics:

Age at menarche (first period) in France
1750 – average of almost 16 years
1850 – a little over 15 years
1900 – 14 years
2000 – 12.5 years

Though there’s obviously no definitive proof that Helen had already entered womanhood at 14, it’s not impossible. Even today many girls have their first period before the age of 18, but does that mean they’re sexually mature enough for marriage?


Yes, a 37-year-old marrying a 14-year-old was very uncommon, there’s no child and therefore no definitive proof that they had sex. Whether or not this was an appropriate marriage all comes down to whether you feel a 14-year-old is mentally prepared for a marriage.

Author: Elder J

32 Responses to "Helen Mar Kimball, Wife of Joseph Smith"

  1. ElderJ Posted on August 4, 2013 at 3:14 pm

    I wanted to give a special thanks to Brian Hales for emailing back and forth with me and helping with this article!

  2. B.H. Posted on August 4, 2013 at 6:47 pm

    I read the article with great interest as I have read Helen Mar Kimball’s autobiography where she clearly states that she only married Joseph for trusting him when he said: “If you will take this step, it will ensure your eternal salvation and exultation and that of your father’s household & all of your kindred”. She continues how “None but God and angels could see my mother’s bleeding heart. She had witnessed the suffering of others who were older & who better understood the step they were taking: to see her child who had scarcely seen her 15th summer, following in the same thorny path, in her mind she saw the misery which was sure to come as the sun was to rise and set: but it was all hidden from me. I would never have been sealed to Joseph, had I known it was anything more than a ceremony.” Her words are enough evidence to know that she was not a willing participant.

  3. Bryan H. Posted on August 4, 2013 at 7:26 pm

    Helen Mar Kimball’s marriage to the prophet is actually one of the few polygamous unions where we have evidence of an absence of sexual relations, i.e. the marriage was purely dynastic. Todd Compton writes in his book “In Sacred Loneliness” that it was her father Heber’s idea to seal the Kimball and Smith families together in the eternities, and he’s the one who approached Joseph Smith with the idea. Also, Helen was apparently under the impression her marriage was “for eternity alone” until she was forbidden to attend a dance with her peers. If she had consummated her marriage it is highly unlikely that she would have been under the impression that her marriage was just for the next life. Compton also cites three cases from polygamy in the Utah era where marriages to underaged brides were not consummated until they were older. I’m surprised that Hales didn’t turn you on to this.

    You have to believe that Helen Mar Kimball had sex with Joseph Smith in this life but concluded that the marriage would only be for the next life.

    • Anonymous
      Anonymous Posted on July 19, 2014 at 8:18 am

      So what does she mean when she writes in her journal “I would never have been sealed to Joseph, had I known it was anything more than a ceremony?”

      Her later discussions are vague (it was the 1800s and such matters were not discussed), but it is clear to nearly anyone (well, anyone who doesn’t have a stake in the outcome) reading them that her delicate evasions still make it clear she had sex with Joseph.

      If you read contemporary statements, if the answer to a direct question about sexuality was no, the woman freely said no. If the answer was yes, the statement was some form of “it’s none if your business” or “a wan doesn’t discuss such things.” Helen never said “no.”

  4. David R Posted on August 4, 2013 at 11:43 pm

    Let’s check the score:

    1) Mormon critics are right. This marriage was abnormal but not unheard of (it WAS unheard of if you account for the fact that he was already married and he used his position as prophet)

    2) Mormon critics might not be right because he was way busy and Emma was jealous. (But they are probably right since that’s a normal part of marriage.)

    3) It might not be immoral because maybe she had reached puberty. (Huh?)

    We can all agree that if he had sex it was illegal sex with a 14-year-old (and other teens) Do we need to go further than that? Why in the world would puberty be the deciding factor of whether it was immoral or not? Can you not see how disgusting this argument is?

    • Charisse
      Charisse Posted on November 2, 2014 at 8:47 pm

      Thank you for this. I was absolutely disgusted when I read question 3. Just because a girl has started menstruating, it’s morally ok to have sex with her?

      I would also note that question 3 is never actually answered. Why does the author here cite it as a necessary question to ask and then not bother answering it? Is the answer supposed to be obvious?

  5. Terry Holland Posted on August 15, 2013 at 1:17 am

    This is a good little analysis, and the graphs are lovely, but how is this relevant to future missionaries?

    The answer is that it isn’t, really. If you look through this site you’ll find that the articles are a much better sample of the set of uncomfortable truths about the LDS Church than they are a sample of the set of useful but lesser known things that missionaries should know. Anyone who has served a mission would agree that knowing, to pick one of the points of this article, the age of pubescence in 19th century France is not at all useful as a missionary.

    This might come up, so I’ll address it: I don’t have any problem with presenting these facts–my problem is with the deception regarding the site creators’ motives.

    And by the way, let’s get real. No believing Mormon uses the tone the writer uses here. It’s not a “bad” tone, that’s not what I’m saying. It’s just not the way Mormons talk. Shame on you for pretending to believe, Jason.

    • Laura D
      Laura D Posted on December 19, 2013 at 2:06 pm

      >”It’s just not the way Mormons talk.”

      Mormons don’t speak in an intellectual, fact-based manner wherein they cite sources and carefully address multiple aspects of a claim? Actually, yeah. I agree with that. Mormons totally don’t talk like that. Good eye, but not exactly to the credit of mormons.

  6. Jeff Posted on August 19, 2013 at 12:00 pm

    I thought the whole point of polygamy was to raise a righteous offspring. Why wouldn’t the relationship be sexual?

  7. ZC Posted on September 22, 2013 at 4:06 pm

    So this article raised two questions but only addressed one of them. Joseph Smith as a manipulator was left completely untouched. Supposing I concede to the argument that it was a completely non-sexual relationship, the guy still manipulated her into marrying him. Further, as pointed out in an earlier comment, she certainly didn’t have good sentiments toward the arrangement according to her autobiography. Sexuality is not by any means the only factor in Joseph’s relationships that cause them to be immoral.

    The title ‘Prophet, Seer and Revelator’ bears some pretty high expectations. Manipulating women into marrying him by using threats from God or by promising salvation falls far short of those expectations. (I mean, didn’t Martin Luther already address this type of behavior in his 95 theses?)

    The guy was extremely dishonest and manipulative in so many documented instances, and that fact isvery damning. It kind of makes me wonder how he would answer the ‘honesty question’ in his bishop’s interviews. Dishonestly methinks.

  8. Anonymous Posted on September 28, 2013 at 4:48 pm

    Seriously!!! Why would anyone find it okay for Joseph Smith to marry 33 wives when a good portion of them were already married and SEALED in the temple to their own spouses… Doesn’t make sense to me. Sounds like a great excuse to have sex with whomever he wanted, whenever he wanted. He only made it a commandment from God when Emma gave him too much trouble over it. This child was only 14 people – 4 years under the legal adult age. Even if there was no sex – he took away her right to be a child!!! How could this info alone not make a TBM question their faith in the Mormon religion. This is never covered in Sunday church meetings or talked about at all. Wonder why… ha!

  9. R.P Posted on October 30, 2013 at 10:15 am

    I have been “less – active” for a few years now for precisely these kinds of issues BUT
    there is so much in the gospel that is good, virtuous and relevant that I find most other religious offerings wishy-washy & insubstantial and a waste of time .
    Unfortunately the church’s claim that a prophet, divinely guided, leads this church rules out the excuse of human frailty that could explain the many inconsistencies and dodgy doings that are documented.
    Either the prophet is divinely guided by Heavenly Father, who being aware of all things, has prepared for all eventualities or he’s not and things get confused.
    I reject the need for deception, God has never made excuses for His decisions, the old testament is the stuff of Edgar Allan Poe, killing the first born in Egypt, the father in Sodom giving his daughter to the mob and later cutting her into pieces?? but it was His will .
    Fast and pray sincerely but if you don’t get an answer do what you think is best, the righteous can call on God for help but children are not specially protected in this life? I’m confused but trying my best.

  10. Mub Posted on November 6, 2013 at 6:06 am

    A couple of things. As someone who has been doing genealogy for overt 30 years, I can tell you that I’ve encountered marriages that raised my 20th century eyebrows. One of my four great-grandmothers was married at age 14 to a 21-year-old in NE Tennessee before the couple/their family migrated to California before the Great Depression. While it was not common practice, I am not surprised when I encounter it. A 4th great-grandfather, barely 16, married a 21-year-old, fathered 3.5 children before going off to fight in the Civil War and went on to father a total of 10 known children. People often migrated in groups and settled in rural areas. They married people they knew and didn’t go far afield. People were poor and lived as subsistence farmers. The incidence of tuberculosis was high in some areas. Folks generally married quickly if they could following the death of a spouse out of necessity — they had land to work and large families to support.

    Sealings in the early church were not limited to spousal or family relationships as they are today, but I imagine were meant to cement the bonds of trust and influence among the leaders of the church.

    In the analysis you present, as in many other interpretations of history today, we tend to impose modern standards and sensibilities on peoples of former times, which I don’t find that useful. I do value trying to understand the existing record on its face and in context.

    One of the things I find very refreshing about Joseph Smith is that he was honest about his frailties and did not claim to be perfect. He was subject to public rebuke by the Lord on repeated occasions. “I do not,” Joseph himself said, “nor never have, pretended to be any other than a man subject to passions, and liable, without the assisting grace of the Savior, to deviate from that perfect path in which all men are commanded to walk” Is that not our hope — realizing that we walk imperfectly in this mortal sphere — to receive that assisting grace?

    • ElderJ
      ElderJ Posted on November 18, 2013 at 5:21 am

      Yep, there were a lot of kids marrying kids, that’s true. This one is unique in that it was a 37-year-old with a 14-year-old. I’m not saying Joseph was wrong, but we’re talking about something different here.

  11. Paul Posted on November 15, 2013 at 5:14 pm

    Compton’s book is clear that the relationship was almost certainly sexual. For all of modern history, we find cult leaders who attract women with their charisma. They have sex with them and take money from their followers. What is more likely? 1) That JS was the one exception to this unfortunate trend in human nature? or 2) That he was like every other Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggert, Ted Haggerty, etc.

    Obviously, the answer is number 2. He was full of baloney on so, so many occasions. He completely lied, bald-faced, lied. “I can translate, through the gift and power of dog, the hieroglyphics on these Egyptian papyri”. Turns out he pulled that stuff out of his rump–made it up as he went along. That’s just what a con man would do. Any no one could read the Egyptian writing anyway. But, as all Mormonism now discovers, science, investigation, and analysis yield the real understanding of science and incomprehensible hieroglyphics.

    BY said people live on the Moon and the Sun. No. Our Sun borrows its light from a star called Kolob. No. We have the answers–no room for dithering or someone else’s opinion. JS did not translate anything. He made stuff up and figured no one would find out.

    Don’t go on a mission. See a therapist about the ostracizing that will inevitably follow a courageous decision to not have a miserable two years of pretending you know about life and what makes people truly happy.

    • Mike
      Mike Posted on December 30, 2013 at 4:24 pm

      No, he didn’t “pull that stuff out of his rump”, the text of the Book of Abraham clearly is an adaptation of Flavius Joseph’s “Antiquities of the Jews” (Hyrum Smith owned a copy and wrote his name on it).

      For example, in chapter 8 we read “Now, seeing he was to take Sarai with him, and was afraid of the madness of the Egyptians with regard to women, lest the king should kill him on occasion of his wife’s great beauty, he contrived this device : – he pretended to be her brother” compare with the Book of Abraham chapter 2 ” 22 And it came to pass when I was come near to enter into Egypt, the Lord asaid unto me: Behold, Sarai, thy wife, is a very fair woman to look upon;
      23 Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see her, they will say—She is his wife; and they will kill you, but they will save her alive; therefore see that ye do on this wise:
      24 Let her say unto the Egyptians, she is thy sister, and thy soul shall live.

      There are many more examples and I leave it to the reader to check them out. The stories are basically the same so either God revealed the same story to Joseph Smith or else he plagiarized.

  12. AB Posted on December 5, 2013 at 5:48 pm

    Take a deep breath there Paul, its gonna be OK:) For the vast majority of us, our mission was an amazing one and a half or two years, and the teachings of Christ and the church have brought the vast majority of us a tremendous amount of happiness. Following the teachings of the church growing up literally saved my life.

    It appears you’ve had a terrible experience from people not following the teachings of Christ to love all, or have seen it happen to others. I don’t excuse their behavior in any way.

    I encourage all who have the desire and a personal testimony to serve a mission. If you have the desire, and go for the right reasons, it will be a tremendous experience. But if you go without the desire, without a testimony, or for the wrong reasons, you do both yourself, those with whom you would serve and those who you would teach a disservice.

    • Whitethunder
      Whitethunder Posted on December 31, 2013 at 10:26 am

      Just try to avoid studying raw unfiltered church history before you go because if you do, you probably won’t go.

  13. Kitty chemist Posted on December 25, 2013 at 4:59 pm

    J ur no elder, ur a fraud. I’m lds convert from Jewish background hence lotsa polygamy in my Jewish background:) ok that said my adorable dr husbands g g+ gma is Lucy walker. 17 yr old sealed to prophet she went on to marry someone else. JS is a Prophet, doubtful last year of life when he got sealed to Helen they had sec but don’t know for sure. Wasn’t JS idea, clearly Hebert c’s I’m a NYer n write in slang;) but let me state clearly you are dishonest not JS like most anti ur a liar love ya anyway for the attempt at deception u stink at it lol

  14. Twin Lights Posted on April 7, 2014 at 12:05 am

    I know of a marriage (in the 1940s) in rural NH where the wife was 16 and the husband in his very late 20s (about 27). The marriage was very long term. Not a single sign of anything other than a good marriage. He waited to marry until he was established as a farmer. Simple point, this happened.

    • Charisse
      Charisse Posted on November 2, 2014 at 8:52 pm

      This analogy would seem more relevant if Joseph Smith had been ten years younger and also “waited to marry until he was established.” When you’re talking about the fact that this was polygamous, the waiting-till-you’re-older argument simply can’t be used because he did in fact marry his first wife fairly young and certainly before he was “established.”

  15. Elder J Posted on July 2, 2014 at 11:48 am

    Thanks, Twin Lights. Yes as I and the LDS apologists state, it did happen, but it was very uncommon.

  16. Brian Hales Posted on October 18, 2014 at 8:30 am

    Hi–I guess I appreciate the acknowledgement, but somehow as you reviewed my material you missed the most important evidence regarding Helen.

    Helen Mar Kimball was not called to testify in the 1892 Temple Lot trial. If she had been sexually involved with the Prophet in their plural marriage, her exclusion from the depositions is difficult to explain. Helen lived in Salt Lake City and had written two books defending plural marriage. Her first, Plural Marriage as Taught by the Prophet Joseph: A Reply to Joseph Smith, Editor of the Lamoni Iowa “Herald” (Salt Lake City: Juvenile Instructor Office, 1882) was a direct response to the claims of the RLDS Church, the plaintiffs in the Temple Lot lawsuit. Her second book, Why We Practice Plural Marriage (Salt Lake City: Juvenile Instructor Office, 1840), echoed many of the same arguments.

    In addition, Helen lived geographically closer than two of the other witnesses who were called, Malissa Lott (thirty miles south in Lehi) and Lucy Walker (eighty-two miles north in Logan). Both of these women affirmed that sexual relations were part of their plural marriages to the Prophet. (See Malissa Lott, Deposition, Temple Lot Transcript, Respondent’s Testimony, Part 3, p. 105, question 227; Lucy Walker, Deposition, Temple Lot Transcript, Respondent’s Testimony, Part 3, pp. 450-51, 468, 473, questions 29-30, 463-74, 586.) Helen’s diary journal for March 1892 documents that she was aware of the visit of the Church of Christ (Temple Lot) contingent, but there is no indication that they or LDS Church leaders approached her to testify. (Charles M. Hatch and Todd M. Compton eds., A Widow’s Tale, the 1884-1896 Diary of Helen Mar Kimball Whitney, 494-95.) That she would have been an excellent witness to discuss and defend the fact that Joseph Smith taught and practiced plural marriage is undeniable.

    The most obvious reason that Helen Mar Kimball was not summoned is that she could not explicitly testify that her plural marriage with the Prophet included conjugality. The polyandrous wives then living (Mary Elizabeth Lightner, Zina Huntington, and Patty Sessions) were similarly not deposed. Proving that Joseph Smith practiced full sexual polygamy was a focus of the attorneys for Church of Christ (Temple Lot) because it showed that the RLDS Church, which did not practice plural marriage, was not the “true” successor to Joseph Smith’s church. This along with all other evidence is strong that Joseph’s sealing to Helen was not consummated.

    I’m not sure how you just missed this important point but please be careful. You could influence a lot of people with misinformation. As a believer that Joseph was a true prophet and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is also true, I believe these kinds of lapses will create future problems for those who promote them.

    Take Care,

    Brian Hales

    • USN77
      USN77 Posted on September 2, 2015 at 3:11 pm

      Actually, Dr. Hales, it seems more probable that Helen and the polyandrous wives were not asked to testify because church leaders figured they could establish Joseph Smith had sexual relations with his plural wives without admitting that the wives he had relations with included a 14-year-old and several women legally married to other living men.

  17. Richard H. Keller Posted on November 3, 2014 at 4:17 pm

    The reference to David Richard Keller PhD is incorrect as listed here.: “David R. Keller, FAIR Blog writer, Ph.D., and Director of the Center for the Study of Ethics at Utah Valley University (UVU) and his article titled 19th Century Nuptiality and Propaganda II.”

    Please note the mistaken attribution and correct it. David passed away on December 28, 2013. He was not active in the LDS Church, but ran the Center For the Study of Ethics at UVU. He was a philosopher. He had not written material related to polygamy, pedophilia, etc.
    Please correct the mistaken attribution.Thanks, Richard H. Keller, MD, father of David Richard Keller, PhD

    • Elder J
      Elder J Posted on November 4, 2014 at 8:19 am

      So sorry, Richard. I dug and dug to try and figure out the author of this article. It almost seems as though no one wants to take responsibility for it. I even contacted FAIR. I thought that in the end I had gotten the right Keller. I’ve removed any reference to who authored it pending figuring out which David Keller wrote it.

  18. Brenda Turnblom Posted on November 13, 2015 at 9:49 am

    There is a five year mental and physical developmental difference between a 14 year old and 19 year old. You have lumped these all together to make marrying a 14 year old seem less wrong..

  19. Scott Posted on August 1, 2016 at 11:06 pm

    In the two years that you are out in the mission field I am absolutely positive of one thing. While you are gone, no one will dig up a Nephite sword. This more or less means that no one with a 6th grade understanding of World History will join the church. But please, knock on as many doors as possible… Cheers!!

  20. Marilyn Posted on August 22, 2016 at 7:18 pm

    You are insane. Onset of menses, then or now, doesn’t signify ready for marriage. There an ENORMOUS difference between 14 and 19. Light years, emotionally and physically. No matter how you slice it, there is NO excuse for Joseph marrying a FOURTEEN YEAR OLD, not even in 1840-whatever. It was rare then for the same reasons it’s rare now–it’s perverted. They are children, even if their bodies develop early. No rationalization on your part can change those FACTS.

  21. OnceActive Posted on December 30, 2016 at 2:33 pm

    The findings drawn from the first graph (line graph showing historical marriages by age) is misleading. You say,”40% of marriages were to 14-19 year olds.” However, removing the bottom two ages, you still end up with ~35% of marriages between 16-19, but also these marriages were generally to 21-23 year old men, not 37 year olds. It’d be interesting to include data about how many lopsided marriages happened at this time. I’d think it would be about as prevalent as we see today, and we all agree it’s wrong today. Im confident that if a poll was done asking members whether practices such as: polyandry, underage marriages to fully grown men/pedophelia, discrimination based on race, communalism, destruction of newspaper presses publishing unflattering information about a church, etc…all of us would condemn such acts as belonging to a cult or at best a church with only portions of truth. But once you precede this information with the name Joseph Smith, everyone rubber stamps it as misunderstood, slandered, or not substantive to a church claiming to have the only direct revelation from God since it’s inception and maintains perfect Gospel adherence as a church, just not at the individual level. It was looking at church history with the possibility of it being made up that ultimately led me to a stronger faith in Christ and ultimately a church that teaches nearly the same doctrines, but without the embarrassing/contradictive history.

  22. Fatfinger Posted on May 8, 2017 at 11:45 am

    >>>>Actually, Dr. Hales, it seems more probable that Helen and the polyandrous wives were not asked to testify because church leaders figured they could establish Joseph Smith had sexual relations with his plural wives without admitting that the wives he had relations with included a 14-year-old and several women legally married to other living men.<<<<

    Yes, someone please address that very valid observation.

    As well as this one: If the marriage to Helen were nonsexual, why was she kept from the company of young men her age? So he could have her to himself when she got older? If she had the body of a woman, I can't imagine JS being so patient, but regardless, how horribly selfish of him to take away the joy of her youth!

    And this: For those that claim the marriage was only to seal families together, why did Helen's mother Vilate refuse when she was asked before Helen? What would obviously be a joyous and wonderful opportunity, to be sealed eternally to the prophet, is met by refusal from Vilate and heartbreak when the target is changed to her daughter.

    And this: We know Joseph is nearly worshiped by the Mormon faithful, but is he God? Who, but God, can promise salvation and exaltation? And why is it so important to Joseph that Helen "take this step" if it is nothing but an eternal sealing??

    Just like everything else about the foundations of Mormonism, when considered objectively, the foundation crumbles.

  23. Zach Posted on July 21, 2017 at 10:36 pm

    Are you kidding me? Did we really just read justification in having sex with “she could have already been menstruating?” Are you for real, “and if they did (have sex) does it matter?”are you people who agree with this brainless? I would love to see this in court, “well your honor I had sex with that twelve year old because I thought she looked like she had already had her period. It’s in Utah history look it up”

Leave a Reply