Russell M. Nelson’s Miracle Stories w/ LDS Discussions Ep. 47

Introduction and Episode Overview

John Dehlin 0:00 Hello everyone, and welcome to another edition of Mormon Stories podcast. I am your host for today, John Dehlin. It is May 18, 2023. We are here in the midst of our epic LDS discussion series where we do our best to analyze, scrutinize LDS Church truth claims as neutrally and as dispassionately and as objectively as possible. Today we are on episode 47 of this series. We are going to be talking about Mormon President and prophet Russell M. Nelson, his miracle stories. I guess the truth claim we're talking about here is the Mormon Church claims to have God's mouthpiece on the earth, a prophet, seer and revelator who communicates in a privileged way with Heavenly Father and with his son, Jesus Christ, a special witness of Christ. And I guess that would mean that you would expect a base level of honesty and integrity with that person. And Mike and a few of our guests have uncovered some information about Russell M. Nelson that they feel potentially calls his honesty or integrity into question. And so that is what today's episode is going to be about. We want to remind you all that this LDS discussion series again is now 47 episodes long. It builds on past episodes, so the best thing you can do is pause this episode, go back, start at episode number one, and watch it all the way through in sequence. You can consume this series on multiple channels on Spotify. LDS Discussions has its own podcast feed, both in audio and video format. Apple Podcast has it as well in audio format. And then the Mormon Stories podcast YouTube channel has a playlist where you can watch these episodes in sequence. And of course, this is all integrated into the the Mormon Stories Podcast general feed. Now the the basis of all of this series is a series of essays written by our dear friend Mike from the website ldsdiscussions.com and we welcome him back now to the program. Hey, Mike, thanks for joining us.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:17 Hey everybody. It's good to be back again.

John Dehlin 2:19 You excited for today?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:20 I actually am excited. This one is, you know, we've done an episode like say when you talk about watching these in order, the episode on the first vision, the priesthood restoration, both give you a lot of examples of how a miracle story can grow. But if you've been watching the recent episodes, we did the one on the transfiguration of Brigham Young and I think that's the most important episode to understanding how a miracle can grow from an ordinary event into something else when it doesn't really happen, but it's accepted by followers of a religion or of any movement as true because it's just told enough. And so those episodes are going to feed into this one as kind of a good foundation to understand how it is that these miracle stories we can now show because of the fact that this is a something that's happened over the last couple of decades has no basis in reality. What, what Nelson is going to tell us in these stories we could show by looking at the accounts, the earlier accounts, and from those who were there. They simply did not happen. And so that lets you. It gives you a window into how leaders of religious movements, especially those who really feel the need to elevate themselves as the Chosen One of God, will stretch the truth in different ways in order to accomplish that. And obviously, just like with some of our earlier episodes, this work is. I mean, I didn't uncover any of this. This was uncovered by other people. And more importantly, Radio Free Mormon had done a podcast a couple years ago, and when I heard that, my first thought was, I've got to get this down on the website, because it's really important within the scope of what I'm trying to do with this overview project in order to kind of show that not only did it happen in the early parts of the church, but it's happening today by the current prophet of the Mormon Church as well.

John Dehlin 4:04 Well, wouldn't it be nice if we could get RFM on the podcast?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 4:06 That was my hope, too. I mean, he said he wasn't available, but, man, that would be crazy if he just popped in.

John Dehlin 4:12 Oh, wait, we have him on the podcast. Radio Free Mormon. Welcome to Mormon Stories podcast. We're so glad you're here.

Examining Nelson's Self-Written Autobiography

Nemo 4:20 Did someone mention one chosen of God? No, I was just reading this fascinating autobiography by Russell Nelson of himself from Heart to Heart. And I was looking over the foreword, which was definitely written by President Spencer W. Kimball.

John Dehlin 4:40 That's lovely, rfm. Thanks so much for joining us. And rfm, we're bringing you on because you. You have done some of the research on this episode, is that right? Do you want to give us just a tiny bit of background?

Nemo 4:52 Yeah, it's section 84 of Radio Free Mormon, actually, episode 84. And I look back when I had done this and I did some the research, and, you know, Russell Nelson has this amazing penchant for gilding the lily and taking pedestrian occurrences and imbuing them with miraculous natures. And that's what we're going to go over tonight. I was surprised to find out it wasn't just a couple years ago. It was actually June of four years ago, 2019. So that this episode released, which was 84 the Miracle Making of President Nelson. I'm so honored and flattered and thankful that you had asked me to come on the show today. And I'll just try and be color

John Dehlin 5:31 commentary and I'll just say please donate to Radio Free Mormon podcast@radiofreemormon.com Please support Mormonism. Org radiofreemormon.org Donate there, become a monthly donor. Also check out Mormonism Live every Wednesday night, Utah time, 6:20pm and support that good show as well, along with with the good bill. Real.

Nemo 5:56 Who is this? Who is this good looking bloke in the right lower corner who apparently modified my name to put brave Sir Robin under Radio Free Mormon?

John Dehlin 6:06 I know that it's Nemo the Mormon.

Guest 3 6:08 Who are you looking for?

John Dehlin 6:12 Welcome Nemo. It's good to have you, Nemo. And check out Nemo the Mormons. Check out NEMO the Mormons YouTube channel as well. Subscribe to that and Mormonism Live.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 6:20 Yeah.

John Dehlin 6:20 And Mike, let's get going.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 6:22 Yeah, let's jump in.

John Dehlin 6:23 All right. Should we go to the first slide?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 6:25 Yeah, let's just jump.

John Dehlin 6:26 Right. I'll just say it's a kind of a serious thing to accuse anyone of being a liar. And it's ultra serious, I guess, to accuse the prophet, seer and revelator of a global religion, accusing him of being a liar. Do we want to address that up front?

Guest 3 6:41 I've done it to his face and you know, that's.

John Dehlin 6:44 But I mean, in all seriousness, a believing Mormon is going to hear this and say this is really serious. Can anyone kind of in seriousness talk about why we would even want to go here?

Nemo 6:55 That's why I'm not saying I'm not allegedly. That's why I was gilding the lily.

John Dehlin 7:00 Okay.

Nemo 7:00 And as serious as it might be, and to question the veracity of the prophet of God, I look at it kind of the other way. And if you're the prophet of God, maybe you have, I don't know, a little bit of a duty, to be honest.

John Dehlin 7:13 Yeah. Okay.

Guest 3 7:14 Well, I was going to go in and say, you know, I did this whole thing where I looked at their honesty and I confronted them directly all by email and that sort of thing. And it is serious. And it does make you kind of stop and think, am I really going to say this? But it's very important because they claim to speak for God. And so when they're speaking in a capacity where you would expect they would be speaking on God's behalf, you absolutely have the right to expect that they be honest. And if they're not being honest, that needs to be pointed out.

John Dehlin 7:40 Yeah, I think that's fair, especially since they claim that you should obey them because of their access to God and Jesus. So. All right, Mike, let's jump to. Let's jump to the first slide. Today's episode is called Russell M. Nelson's Miracle Stories. Take it away, Mike.

The Woman in the Hat Miracle Story

Nemo 7:56 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 7:57 And just as I mentioned earlier, in previous episodes, we've covered how almost every miraculous foundational story from early church history has later been proven to be like a late addition, a fabrication, an evolution of another story. And so if you look at Joseph Smith and you look, you could track the evolution of the first vision and the priesthood restoration, and you could see in both stories that details are retrofitted back into the church's history years after they were claimed to have happened, with a lot of changes and additions taking place in the process. And if you haven't watched those episodes, please go back and do that, because they're very important to kind of understanding that this is something that's been going on from the beginning. And we covered, as I mentioned in the Transfiguration of Brigham Young, which is the story I was told, was the reason that members of the church knew that Brigham Young was the rightful successor as prophet to Joseph Smith. And the more, you know, you dig into the transfiguration, it's just like Joseph Smith's miracles. And that not a single contemporary source mentions this happening until almost a decade later. And the story is completely retrofitted back into the church's history as a miracle witnessed by many, even as all of the contemporaneous accounts make absolutely no mention of it happening. And so, just as early church leaders created these miracle stories to kind of establish their authority as the chosen, you know, prophets of God, the current prophet of the church, Russell Nelson, has now been caught fabricating or exaggerating at least four of his miracle stories. And in this episode, we want to highlight all of those stories because we want to show that this is a pattern from leaders who claim to speak for God, that they're willing to embellish or outright make up stories, or at least make up miraculous details in the stories as a way to establish their credibility among believers and to elevate their own status in the name and voice of God, and tie that a bit into our episode on Spiritual Witnesses, because when we hear these stories, you feel the spirit, right? And then you find out later that those stories didn't happen that way. And that has to make you Question what exactly you're feeling if you're getting a spiritual witness on a story that didn't happen as it's being told.

John Dehlin 9:54 Okay. And. And RFM and Nemo, I don't want to have to ask you each slide whether you want to contribute. So I'm just going to ask you, y', all to unmute, and I'll know then that you want to say something. So rfm, you just.

Nemo 10:08 I just unmuted for no particular reason. But I will say that in the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon, I understand that there is a passage that says, the Holy Ghost does bear witness to untruth.

John Dehlin 10:20 Oh, okay.

Nemo 10:22 That explains it, kind of.

John Dehlin 10:24 All right, do you want to explain it?

Guest 3 10:26 Citation needed.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 10:28 Yeah.

Nemo 10:29 This would fall under the heading of sarcasm, John.

John Dehlin 10:32 Okay, got it.

Nemo 10:34 I'll meet myself now.

John Dehlin 10:36 Oh, that's good. Okay, let's go to the next slide. Mike.

Guest 3 10:39 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 10:39 So to me, this is the first one.

John Dehlin 10:41 Is this the first.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 10:41 Is the first story, And I think this is the one that really sets the table for everything else. And so this is a story, and it's known. I believe RFM coined the term for it is the Woman in the Hat, I believe, from his podcast. And so this is a story that was told by Russell Nelson in multiple settings and.

John Dehlin 10:57 Hey, Mike. Hey, Mike. RFM wants to say something.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 10:59 Yeah.

Nemo 10:59 Oh, shoot. I did it again. I'm so sorry. Okay, look, I got to do a totally different pattern than I do on Mormonism Live because there I accidentally mute myself all over the place. Now I'm going to intentionally mute myself.

John Dehlin 11:10 No, it's okay. You know, rfm, it's okay. Don't worry about muting or unmuting. Just speak up when you want to say something.

Nemo 11:15 Okay. Really good. Thank you.

John Dehlin 11:16 Yeah. Okay. Keep going, Mike. Keep going.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 11:18 Yeah. And so if you go back to the slide, this is a story that he told. And what ended up happening is that the church is going to release an excerpt from an autobiography or biography that is written about Russell Nelson by Sherry Dew once he became prophet. It's called Insights from a Prophet's Life. President Russell M. Nelson. And so this excerpt is titled. You didn't read it, did you? And it's Nelson telling the story about when he was in Korea on active duty and he meets a nurse named Beverly. And this is from the excerpt. I don't know if Nemo, if you want to read this for us.

Guest 3 11:51 Sure.

Nemo 11:52 One moment.

Guest 3 11:54 Okay. Young Lieutenant Nelson performed many operations in less than optimal conditions. One day, a nurse named Beverly Ashcraft approached him at the end of an operation in which she had assisted him. What makes you different from all the other surgeons I work with? She asked, likely assuming that he would have a straightforward answer. Dr. Nelson thought for a moment and responded much differently than she expected. Well, I don't know that I'm different, but if I am, it's because I know the Book of Mormon is true. Not only was Beverly not expecting that answer, she was not impressed with it. It was only out of a sense of duty that she accepted Dr. Nelson's offer to borrow the one and only copy of the Book of Mormon he had at the time. Her husband Derwin was a fellow surgeon, and a few days later he returned the book, tossed it to Russell and muttered a feeble thanks. That is a totally inappropriate answer for someone who has read the book of Mormon, Lt. Nelson responded. You didn't read it, did you? I'm asking you and Beverly to read it. And when you have, then I want my book back. The Ashcrafts did read the book, and over a period of time, Lieutenant Nelson taught them the gospel. In 1951, he baptized them, and then he lost track of the ashcrafts.

John Dehlin 13:08 Why are you laughing, Nemo? Say it.

Guest 3 13:10 So much of this is just implausible and leaves out so many of the details involved in any of this type of encounter. And it's convenient that he lost track of the Ashcrafts because then no one can go find the Ashcrafts to verify whether this ever happened.

John Dehlin 13:27 All right, rfm, I saw you giggling. Anything you want to add?

Nemo 13:30 No, it's just almost like President Nelson dated them, dunked them and dropped them.

John Dehlin 13:37 Yeah, yeah.

Nemo 13:38 That's the only purpose, really, is to get them converted, baptize them, and then you lose track of. Look, I shouldn't say that because they're over there in the Korean War. It's a mass unit. It's 1951, and I've certainly lost track of pretty much everybody I was with on my mission for two years, and that was in 79 to 81.

Guest 3 13:57 Apart from Kyles McKay.

Nemo 13:59 Yes.

Guest 3 13:59 Didn't lose track of him.

Nemo 14:01 Who I am hoping, by the way. Do you want to talk about your prediction, Nemo, that there's going to be an apostle? Go ahead.

Guest 3 14:07 I've already made this prediction. I think that an apostle will be down an apostle by the next conference, and so we'll have to. We'll have to see whether Brother Corbett, Elder Corbett, ends up as the first African American apostle.

Nemo 14:22 Yes, and I'm hoping for two apostles to bite the Dust so that Kyle, my former missionary companion, can become an apostle. Because I'm getting tired of saying that my former missionary companion is the church historian. I want him to be an apostle.

John Dehlin 14:35 Why are we. Why are we pining for the demise of Mormon apostles here? No, I'm just being silly.

Guest 3 14:41 No pining, just predictions. They're quite elderly because in the LDS

Nemo 14:46 Church, progress occurs one death at a time.

John Dehlin 14:49 Oh, man, we're. We're jumping off the track of our.

Nemo 14:52 I'm sorry. You knew the danger when you had me on. I apologize. I'll go back to mute.

John Dehlin 14:57 We knew who you were when we picked you up. Rfm. Okay, so going back to this. This story, I'm just gonna say if I've got a surgeon who's a Muslim, I don't know that I feel better. If he says, you know, if. If I'm a. If I'm a great surgeon, it's because of my belief in the Quran, not because I have anything against belief, and not because I have anything against the Quran. I just don't know that it's professional for a physician to be claiming that their skill is tied to their belief in a religious book. Does anybody. Is anybody just. Just kind of faced face value, bothered by the story? Yeah.

Guest 3 15:41 Because he didn't need to bring that into it. Yeah. And there's no connection to it. What makes him different to the other surgeons? It's not his belief in the Book of Mormon. That's not what she will have been observing. It's him trying to shoehorn it into the conversation.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 15:54 Yeah. I mean, this reads like a conversation that you would write if you're trying to almost do, like, a exaggerated caricature of something, you know, like, this just doesn't read like a natural conversation. Like, I can't picture, you know, first of all, she. She wasn't a nurse. And that's another issue with the story, is that he refers to as a nurse, but in his earlier telling, she's not a nurse. So that's an issue. But regardless, if someone came up to me, I can't picture them being like, what makes you so awesome? And I'd be like, well, now that you mention it, it just feels like a really narcissistic kind of comment. And that's why when you read that, you kind of, like, giggle, because it's like, you know, if someone came up to me and they're like, what makes you so great? I noticed somebody that's just so great. I would not write a. Go and write a book that's like, you would not believe this, but people, fellow people in my profession are coming up to me and being like, what makes you so awesome? He's doing this because he's trying to make himself separate from everyone else in the world. This is one of those things where you're like, the. The people, the members of the Mormon Church have that. That light, right? That light in their eyes that other people notice. And that's what this is about. And so it doesn't read to me like a real conversation. And if it. If it is a real conversation, it makes Nelson look even worse because it's almost like not even. It's not even a humble brag. It's just a brag in his. In his biography. It just kind of comes off weird.

Nemo 17:12 Yeah. And isn't the question that she apparently or allegedly says to him, what makes you so different?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 17:18 Yeah, different from the.

Nemo 17:19 Isn't that the question?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 17:20 Yeah.

Nemo 17:20 Yeah. Wouldn't it be kind of funny if she actually thought he was kind of a dick and that's why she's asking the question?

Guest 3 17:25 And then he goes, yeah, it's because I have a belief in the Book of Mormon. It's like, well, that tracks.

Nemo 17:30 Because the rest of the story makes him sound like kind of a dick.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 17:34 It does. The rest of the story does. I mean, that's the thing. It's like, again, imagine a missionary go to a missionary, and you do the first discussion. They come back for the second, you hand them the books like, you know what? I'm good. And they just chuck it back on the table like, you didn't read it. It's like, nobody would do that. This is who in the world.

Guest 3 17:48 I think we need to put. We need to put a viewer discretion warning on this, because I feel like all sense of neutrality and tone is.

John Dehlin 17:55 I'm canceling our disclaimer for viewers and listeners. If you want an objective attempt at analyzing truth claims, just skip this episode.

Guest 3 18:04 Because RFM brings out the worst in all of us.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 18:06 No, I mean, I.

Nemo 18:07 Honestly, I think my gift to the spirit.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 18:09 It's objective, though, to be like, what kind of person would throw the Book of Mormon back at them and say, you didn't read it? Like, that doesn't make sense. And if someone did that to me, I'd be like, well, screw you, dude. Like, I'm done. Like, I was already done, and now I'm, like, really done. Not just with the Book of Mormon, but with you. Because that's. How rude is that?

John Dehlin 18:25 It reminds me of my. Go ahead.

Nemo 18:28 The good news is it's never really even happened anyway.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 18:30 Yeah, exactly.

John Dehlin 18:31 So go ahead.

Nemo 18:33 He's just, you know, it's a made up story in which he is portrayed as a dick.

John Dehlin 18:38 It reminds me of the character in the Simpsons. Is it Ralph? It's like, I read the Book of Mormon, you know, I mean, does he want. If Mitt Romney's in the Senate and somebody says, where do you get your skill to be a senator? And is Mitt Romney supposed to say to his fellow senators, it's because I read the Book of Mormon?

Guest 3 18:56 Well, yes, he is meant to. According to Russell M. Nelson, that is what he should do.

Nemo 19:01 I know. And when I read this story, I know it's in a MASH unit in Korea. And I gotta tell you, I'm getting a distinct Frank vibe, Frank Burns kind of vibe from this story.

John Dehlin 19:11 That's a Boomer reference. Rfm. You're a boomer.

Guest 3 19:14 Did not get that one at all.

John Dehlin 19:16 Sorry. All right, Mike, let's go to the next slide.

The Couple Baptized Through Nelson's Prompting

Mike (LDS Discussions) 19:20 Yeah. And so basically, as we talked about, this couple is baptized. Which brings us to the rest of this excerpt where Nelson, who's now an apostle, is giving a talk at a state conference in Tennessee. And during the Sunday morning session of the conference, Elder Nelson says he was drawn to a woman wearing a large hat and sitting on the left hand side of the chapel. He asked the stake president who she was. The stake president didn't know, but he managed to learn that her name was Beverly Zitting. When Elder Nelson went to the pulpit, he felt prompted. Keep that in mind. Prompted to call this young woman to join him. How long have you been a member of the church? He asked her, with the congregation looking on. Thirty years, she responded. And who baptized you? He then asked. After a brief pause, she answered, you did in 1951. And then, you know, Russell Nelson says, what is your name again? And she explained that when Elder Nelson had baptized her, her name had been Beverly Ashcraft and. And her husband's name, Derwin. After he died, she had remarried and now had. Now she had a large family who were active in the church. Beverly, how many people connected with you have come into the church since I baptized you? Elder Nelson asked. You won't believe this, she told him in the congregation, but two nights ago I had a dream that Elder Maxwell and just as a quick side note, Elder Maxwell was supposed to give the talk. And at the last second, they subbed in Elder Nelson to give the talk. So she says, two nights ago I had a dream that Elder Maxwell would ask me that very question. So she had come prepared, and she pulled out of her purse a paper with the names of all the people who had come into the church as a result of her baptism. The number was 80.

John Dehlin 20:53 Well, this sounds like a bona fide miracle.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 20:55 That's. That's like. This is like a transfiguration of Brigham Young style miracle. This is a huge one.

John Dehlin 21:00 Why are you nodding? Why are you shaking your head no?

Guest 3 21:02 Because RFM likes magic. And he'll know that when you get up on stage and you pull someone on stage and go, now, we've never met before, have we? Then they are absolutely a plant. So to my cynical mind, at worst, this is a woman who has planted the audience to create a faith promoted story. Or it just didn't happen. Because also, it's really difficult to measure causality. Because he's gonna ask her to measure the causality of her joining the church in terms of the influence it had on other people join the church. She can't accurately put a number on that. She can list her progeny, but apart from that, she can't really. It's very difficult to track that kind of causality. Sorry. Rfm.

John Dehlin 21:37 Unmute yourself. Rfm. Unmute yourself.

Nemo 21:40 You see, There we go. That's why I do it. Okay. It's obviously not a true miracle, even in this highly embellished account, because her dream was of Elder Maxwell. A true dream would have had it be Elder Nelson, in spite of the fact that it was supposed.

Guest 3 21:53 Yeah, and then she would have said, and I didn't know why I was having a dream of Elder Nelson because Elder Maxwell was meant to be speaking. But yeah, I just did. Yeah, good point.

Nemo 22:01 Yeah. This woman's having dreams about Elder Maxwell. President Nelson is drawn to this woman in the large hat. There's a lot of sexual undertones going on in this story.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 22:10 I don't know about that, but. Yeah, certainly.

Guest 3 22:15 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 22:16 It's an absurd setup.

John Dehlin 22:19 So should we go to the next slide, Mike?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 22:23 Yeah, let's just jump into the next one. And so this is the problem with making up miracle stories. We talked about this with the transfiguration of Brigham Young. When this excerpt was released, the Truth and Transparency foundation was contacted by the daughter and granddaughter of Beverly and Derwin. And this is the problem. Nelson actually told this story in 1984, and he also told it in his biography on, at the time, lds.org in these retellings, there is no mention of Korea. There's no mention of Beverly being a nurse or a serendipitous encounter at a state conference in Tennessee. So all of those miraculous elements were not in Nelson's earlier tellings of the story. And the reason is that none of these miraculous elements happened. According to Beverly's daughter and granddaughter, Leslie and Katie, Beverly was never a nurse. She never lived in Korea, and she didn't know Nelson until her husband introduced her to him. So that whole idea of her saying, what sets you apart? What makes you a better surgeon? It couldn't have happened because she wasn't a nurse. Like, when I say that conversation seems made up, it's because it was. And you know, more damning to Nelson's story is that Leslie and Katie were involved in the state conference meeting in Tennessee and have directly refuted every miraculous element of Nelson's retelling of the story from his biography. And so this is from the article from the Truth and Transparency foundation about the excerpt. There was an encounter in the 1980s at a state conference. Shortly after Nelson was called to be an apostle, he traveled to Knoxville to speak at the conference. Leslie and Katie were both living with Beverly in Knoxville at the time. When they heard Nelson was coming to town, they made sure to attend. That makes sense. They remember that Nelson was aware of who Beverly was and knew she was in attendance. He did call her up to the podium during his talk and told everyone about her baptism story and about how there are many members of the church today as a result of her conversion. There was no dream the night before. There was not a prepared note in her purse, and there was no confusion on the part of Nelson as to who she was. Katie adds that her grandmother has never worn a hat to church and did not have a hat on that day. So every single miraculous part of this was made up. And we know that because the daughter and the granddaughter had to contact Desiree Book, he'd be like, stop the presses. Literally, because this is all made up. And they did. They were already printing the book. They had to stop printing the book to get the story out because it's so completely made up.

John Dehlin 24:38 Busted.

Nemo 24:39 This is how you know that President Nelson is a true prophet. Because God intervened to help him not get caught in this absurd lie of his.

Guest 3 24:48 That's the way you could look at it. Also, I mean, the question that immediately comes to my mind is what was the membership standing of Beverly and Leslie at the time they were reached out to? Because people might try and say they were just angry ex Mormons who were trying to undermine his story. Etc.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 25:02 Yeah, for what it's worth, they said in the article at the Truth and Transparency. It talked about how much the family revered Nelson, how much they loved him. And they actually said the reason that they contacted Deseret book is because they didn't want to have to basically lie about it when people talk to him about it. Because apparently someone had contacted them after reading the excerpt on LDS Living, and they read it and said, that's not right. And then when they contacted, they got it. So there is no appearance that there's any animosity, and there's no appearance that they left the church, or if they did, they certainly didn't mention it or have any. You know, there's no indication there's ill.

Guest 3 25:34 Just a point worth addressing.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 25:35 No, it is, and it's a good one.

Nemo 25:37 Yeah. And Beverly, who was still around at the time, time that this all broke open, apparently. So she was put in this position, this very uncomfortable position of the guy who baptized her, which I think they met at Walter Reed, not in Korea. But the guy who baptized her, he did baptize her. And her husband, he becomes an apostle. That's huge. But now people are reading the story and coming up to her and saying, wow, this is an incredible miracle story that happened at that Stake center and everything. And she's put in the uncomfortable position of either having to go along with a story that she knows is false or be in her mind, maybe backstabbing President Nelson by setting the record straight. So the daughter and granddaughter wanted to set the record straight on her behalf, so she wasn't put in that position. The other thing I wanted to say, Sherry Dew is writing this book, Right. She didn't get this out of whole cloth. I don't presume that she's making this up. She got the story from President Nelson. She's writing his autobiography. And I am also equally assured that before it was being published, all of the proofs in the galleys had gone to President Nelson for review to sign off on. So it had his imprimatur of approval before it began to be published. So I don't think there's an easy way for him to get out of this one.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 26:58 No, I don't either. And the one that really sticks out to me is that Nelson is using the direct idea that he got a prompting from God to call Beverly up. So here we have an apostle of the church now, a prophet of the church, who is saying that he received a prompting from God to call the woman up because he saw her with a hat. And we know he's. I'm gonna say he's lying about it. So we have a prophet of the Mormon Church on record lying about receiving a prompting from God. And that is where you got to go. If he's willing to lie about saying God told him to call this woman up to join him, then you have to then look at all the other things he says where I got an impression or I got a prompting. And you have to now view it through the lens of he's already been proven to make up these promptings in order to elevate himself. This story benefits Russell Nelson over everyone else. This is a story about saying, I am someone that God favors because he is going to give me this special prompting. He's going to send a woman with a hat to this meeting that I'm going to give that God's going to give a special dream to two nights earlier, and all of it's made up. And so when you have the prophet of the church who's willing to lie about details directly from God, that's a problem. And I know, as you said earlier in the episode, that saying the word liar is rough, but in this case, I don't know how else you would frame it when you're directly adding to a story that you had told before without these details. And then you add in details that are demonstrably not true from the family involved itself. That, that's, I mean, how else would you call it besides saying he lied?

Nemo 28:23 I would say he told a story that was not consistent with the facts.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 28:27 Yes. That's why you're a lawyer and not me.

John Dehlin 28:32 I mean, devil's advocate. You could argue that he wants the members to bear testimony of the Book of Mormon that'll benefit the lives of the members because you gain a testimony by burying it and it'll help promote the church and, you know, because of all the members are bearing testimony of their love for the Book of Mormon to the world. So you could argue that he feels like this story is going to benefit the church and the members.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 28:57 You could, but he's still lying to do it. I mean, like, however you want to do it. It's like the. What's that phrase? There's many ways to skin a cat. Which is a horrible phrase, but I know that's a phrase. It's like you could, you could promote faith in the Book of Mormon without making up a story. And again, it's one thing to make up a story, obviously that's bad. But you make up a story where you're lying about spiritual promptings from God and you're Basically lying about a visionary experience that this woman would have had two nights earlier to write down on a piece of paper the number of people she brought in the church. So not only is he making himself a liar by saying that he received this prompting, he's making Beverly Ashcraft a liar by putting into her mouth that she received a. Basically a vision in a dream to write down how many people came into the church because of her baptism. And so, I mean, I think, again, you could promote faith without lying, and that's really something, as we've done in our previous episodes, the church doesn't do. Joseph Smith could have promoted faith in himself as the prophet of the Church without creating Peter, James, and John and retrofitting it into the revelation on the priesthood. Or he could have done it without constantly changing the first vision and making it grander and grander, but he doesn't, because as we've done with these episodes, the grander the miracle, the more basically it looks. Makes you look better. And as I said, the story is not about. I mean, it might be about promoting the Book of Mormon, but this is a book about promoting Russell Nelson. That's why it's an autobiography about his life, especially coming out as he's becoming prophet. And you want all the members to look at you with, you know, those big, you know, fawning eyes and. And revere him as, okay, something you can't be yourself.

The Mozambique Miracle and Alleged Fabrication

John Dehlin 30:31 Okay, so. And let me just make sure I understand. So this. This story was intended for a biography, and it made it into the biography or it was removed last minute.

Nemo 30:39 Which was in the biography.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 30:41 Yeah, it was in there and was removed as it was printing.

John Dehlin 30:44 It was removed.

Nemo 30:46 They published an excerpt at LDS Living as a promo.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 30:49 Yeah.

Nemo 30:50 For the book. So they have the story as a promo. Read this great chapter, this wonderful story, so you'll buy the book. And that's how the cat got out of the bag and God saved President Nelson.

John Dehlin 31:01 So. So ultimately, they didn't end up in the final printing of the book, including this false story.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 31:07 Right. Because they. They stopped the printing and then reprinted.

John Dehlin 31:10 So as scorekeeper here, I think it's. I think it's LDS discussions 1 Russell Nelson, 0. Because his own family members deny that this story happened. And I would take, I don't know, rfm, if this is legally legit, but I would take them removing the story as. As ample evidence that they. They must have acknowledged that at least it was problematic, if not outright false.

Guest 3 31:34 It's a tacit admission, right?

John Dehlin 31:36 Yeah.

Nemo 31:36 Yeah. And just to make it Clear. It wasn't his family members. It was Beverly's family member.

John Dehlin 31:41 What did I say? Did I say.

Nemo 31:43 You said his family members.

Guest 3 31:44 Yeah, it just.

John Dehlin 31:45 Okay.

Nemo 31:46 It's okay.

John Dehlin 31:46 Her family members. Thank you. All right. All right. So. So, LDS discussions one, Russell M. Nelson, zero. Let's go to the next story.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 31:56 Yeah. And just for the record, I can't take the point because other people did this research, but, yeah, either way, Russell Nelson's miracle in Mozambique. And this one is all from Radio Free Mormons podcast. So this, yeah, this, this. This is a good podcast. It's going to cover in a lot more detail what we're going to do today. So if you've never listened, check that one out. He says episode 84, right?

Nemo 32:17 Yes, episode 84. Thank you.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 32:19 If you have not listened to it, you need to listen to it because it's got a lot more detail than we're going to cover today. So this is the second one. And this is basically a claimed assassination attempt on Russell M. Nelson in Mozambique. And as I said, this was from the great Radio Free Mormon podcast. And this is happening in May of 2009. Russell and Wendy are visiting the mission president in Mozambique when they were the victims of an armed robbery while eating dinner. We can look at the official church statement right from when it happened. And they say on Friday evening, they were having dinner together in the mission president's home when armed assailants enter the home and rob them. We don't have complete information yet, but we understand that Sister Packard's arm was broken. In addition, she and others suffered some superficial injuries, mainly cuts and bruises. Elder and Sister Nelson will continue their assignment over the weekend as planned. So if you read the initial statement, it's clear that a robbery did occur, that Cindy Packard suffered a broken arm during the attack. But just as with the earlier story about the woman in the hat, this story begins with an event that absolutely did happen to some degree, but is going to grow grander as it's retold by the Nelsons.

The Burglary and Robbery Stories

John Dehlin 33:30 Okay.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 33:31 So I don't know if anyone has anything to add, but we can jump to the next slide if not.

Nemo 33:35 But yeah, there's no incident so mundane that President Nelson can't make it into a miracle.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 33:42 Yeah, pretty much. Or Wendy.

Guest 3 33:44 But yeah, indeed. Yeah, we can move on to the next slide.

John Dehlin 33:47 There we go.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 33:49 So this. There's a KSL article that has the church's statement, and they also state that the missionaries in the area were warned to be careful in the area, and they say that former missionaries to Mozambique, who we talked to with Saturday, tell us they were warned to always be cautious and told about the dangers of life in the African nation. Austin Hill served a Latter Day Saint mission in Mozambique in 2002 and 2003. He says the people are very friendly. The mission home before the current one got broken into and the church employed guards were there all day. One of three guards they employed had orchestrated the whole thing. Hill said, when you hear of something happening in the neighborhood, as you're there, it's usually with a machete. And so we're not trying to take away from the attack and the armed robbery in any way. Obviously, it's awful that Cindy Packard was harmed and that her arm was broken. And I think, in my opinion, and RFM made this point in his podcast, she was the hero because she recognized the robbery quickly and she was running outside to get help. She was the only one who could speak the other language. I don't know what language they speak there, but she could speak it. And Portuguese. Portuguese. Okay, cool. And so Blair and Cindy Packard released their own statement. And this is really important. Four armed gunmen overpowered our one guard. We were threatened verbally and physically. Cindy was roughed up, but finally did get away to warn other guards and neighbors who came to our assistance. She suffered a fracture in her left elbow, other bruises and skin knees. Elder Nelson was accosted as well, but is fine with minimal injury. And then during the statement, they say Elder and Sister Nelson were not specifically targeted or that this was in any way an act against the church. So this is the mission president and his wife. And again, I want to read this line. Elder and Sister Nelson were not specifically targeted or that this was any act against the church. And that's very important because as you're going to see, the Nelson's did not get that memo.

Guest 3 35:39 No, they did not get that memo at all.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 35:42 Yeah.

John Dehlin 35:44 Okay, so next slide.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 35:45 All right, just jump right in. So Wendy Nelson, and if you remember, we did an episode on Revelation and Wendy Nelson was. Was very happy to say that Russell Nelson, since he became prophet, became unleashed. She was free to do all the things he wanted to do. She's very happy to speak about the life of a prophet's wife. And I'll leave it at that. But what I want to say is the mission president, as we said, said that they were not targeted. And so I want you to remember this because just a few months later, Wendy Nelson is going to give a talk at a Timeout for Women event in Utah. And this is part of her talk from a November 20, 2009 conference. She says, the four armed robbers had one intention, to harm my husband and to make me, to take me hostage. So in just a few months, we've gone from the mission president, his wife saying that they were not specifically targeted, this was not an act against the church, to Wendy Nelson turning this robbery into a kidnapping attempt, even though the mission president said that was not what happened. And so, Wendy, then, of course, you never wasted. Never waste a crisis. Is going to use this incident to teach that the four armed men didn't barge into the home, but casually entered almost unnoticed, exactly like the adversary does. Because every good miracle story needs to be tied back to a lesson for church members to follow, basically to keep them afraid that Satan's always lurking behind the corner. And, you know, finally, Wendy elevates herself by stating that just before that man walked in, an intense, beautiful peace came upon me. Which, again, is a really similar tactic to what Russell Nelson does with his other stories. But the irony is that if Wendy Nelson felt this peace because she knew something bad was about to happen, it's interesting that she didn't bother to warn the other people at the dinner so that they could be better prepared for the impending harm. I just. I find that really interesting that she, again, is. She's elevating herself here to say that she got this beautiful piece knowing something was about to go down, and yet there's no record of her bothering to tell anyone else about it.

Nemo 37:37 Yeah, that was the Holy Ghost fault, actually. He hit the peace button instead of the Spidey Sense button.

Guest 3 37:45 Yeah, probably.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 37:46 Yep.

Nemo 37:47 It can happen. They're right next to each other on the console. Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 37:50 Yeah, apparently.

Guest 3 37:51 But isn't interesting how she takes this. And. And again, I think this points to the idea of what the motive is, what the drive is, and I think this goes back to something I said in the last episode. But the idea that is because she wants to promote faith, because she wants to teach a story about Satan, she feels justified in taking this event that did happen to her and adjusting the details of it so that it fits that narrative. And it's. It's the problem. It's the same problem with LDS lawyers being the church historian, because lawyers serve a party, they serve a motive, they serve a client. And the client that the LDS Church historian serves is faith promotion to the exclusion of the truth or anything else. So that's the problem with not having an actual historian, and it's the same problem. Well, Wendy's experiencing now what she needs to do is promote people's faith and that trumps the truthful retelling of this story.

Nemo 38:47 Yeah, and of course she's going to be the hero. It all revolves around them. And I compare this with unfortunately, back in 2017 summer when Elder Holland was given the talk to the mission presidents about the miracle story about the brother who, you know, grew up, went, joined the Hell's Angels and then his younger brother joins him and the dogs just fall asleep, this whole thing and he gets converted back to the church, he gets contacted. That's completely true except for all the miracle parts. So there was a public retraction of it in the Deseret News, amazingly enough. But the difference is that Elder Holland's story, as incorrect as it was, was not a story that made him look good. It's about some other people and he's just telling it. Elder Nelson. And now President Nelson's stories end up being more in the vein of Paul Leach Dunn because they're not just fabricated miracle stories about somebody, they're about him. And they make him look good.

Guest 4 39:51 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 39:52 And you know, to Nemo's point, because his whole point, or I shouldn't say his whole point, his point was that Wendy Nelson is giving a talk. She wants us to be faith promoting and therefore she is going to feel confident enough to maybe embellish details or in this case make them up. But that story, if you're going to make the story about the adversary is always around you, you could still have that story without saying that you were about to be taken hostage or that they were trying to harm your husband. You could just say, yeah, we were at dinner, we were eating, everything was good, and these men just walked in super casually and then attacked us and tried to rob us. It would have the same exact story. But as RFM pointed out, she needs to make her the hero. She needs to make Russell Nelson the hero. Because now there, I think at this point Nelson is profit already, right? No, no, at this point he's not. Cuz it's 2009. So he, she, I mean they're, they're in line. He's in line to be prophet. And all of a sudden it's like we need to make this story more impactful and more showing that we're the chosen ones, that we're getting a warning from the Holy Ghost that other people are not getting. And I think that you see that throughout these stories and to me, when you see it a few times, it's pretty telling that Nelson has a real deep need to make Himself, the hero of all of these stories.

John Dehlin 41:05 Well, let's go to the. Let's maybe go to the next slide. I think that is a good transition.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 41:10 Yeah. And so, like any good relay race, Russell Nelson is going to take the baton from Wendy and he's just going to run with it. And so this is going to get ramped up even further when Russell Nelson retells the story almost five years later in a broadcast to 153 stakes. And just pay attention to how Nelson is going to completely change the story to make himself look exactly like the chosen prophet, the chosen one.

Guest 3 41:31 Can I read this? Yeah, I really want to read this. Okay.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 41:33 Yeah, please do.

Guest 3 41:34 On one occasion, we were attacked by armed men with malicious intent. They announced their purpose to kidnap her and to kill me. After they maliciously molested us in those evil objectives, they became totally foiled. A gun to my head failed to fire, and my wife was suddenly released from their hideous grasp. Then they disappeared as quickly as they had appeared. We were mercifully rescued from potential disaster. We know we were protected by angels round about us.

John Dehlin 42:08 Can I just state the obvious, that that does not sound like the previous accounts that you just read in previous slides.

Guest 3 42:13 No, it doesn't.

Nemo 42:14 It completely different.

John Dehlin 42:16 Yeah, that's just disturbing. This is the first time I'm hearing this.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 42:20 By the way, this makes Paul. Paul Dunn's stories look. Look pretty mundane, honestly.

John Dehlin 42:24 That's unbelievable.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 42:25 Yeah, it really is. And I know if you're a believer, you're like Nemo. Why are you reading it kind of sarcastically? But again, I just want to repeat, the mission president at the time said Elder and Sister Nelson were not specifically targeted. And now you've got Russell Nelson saying they walked in, announced their purpose to kidnap her and kill me. And now remember, the Nelsons, I don't believe could speak Portuguese. Sister Packard can. Elder Packard can. And yet they, in their statement said that they were not specifically.

Guest 3 42:54 Didn't. You know President Nelson has perfect pitch, and that means you can speak whatever language you like. That's kind of what he says about his Mandarin skills, is it not?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 43:01 Yeah.

Nemo 43:01 Witty had said that it was Cindy, the mission president's wife, who was the one who was fluent in Portuguese. So there was a possibility that maybe it was actually Cindy who understood them. Because if you're a robber, of course that's what you're going to do. You come in, you make your announcement you want to do. I'm going to kidnap you, and I'm going to kill the guy who could pay her ransom. Yeah. I don't know. It's not the greatest plan. Maybe they're not the smartest robbers in the world. It's the game that couldn't shoot straight. Also, up to this point, there's no reason to think they have anything other than machetes, which is what that missionary said. It almost always happens with machetes. Right. They're armed. They've been consistently described as armed in the U.S. we typically conflate that or frequently conflate it with guns. But machetes, you're armed with a weapon. So up until now, there's no reason to think it's anything unusual, by which I mean other than machetes. And now we get the introduction specifically of a gun which misfires because obviously one of them took their gun, put it to President Nelson's head and pulled the trigger.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 44:10 Yeah. And in the statement from, from Sister Packard, the one that they made at the time, they do say four armed gunmen. So they do make reference to guns, at least contemporaneously. So we.

Nemo 44:20 Oh, did they. They say armed gunman. They just. Okay, I apologize. Oh, the other thing about Cindy speaking the Portuguese is that according to Wendy, Cindy had already run out into the street to call for help.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 44:31 Yes.

Nemo 44:31 So she would not have been there to interpret for the Portuguese speaking robbers. So maybe they also spoke English.

Guest 3 44:39 And I just want to say that I didn't read it sarcastically. I read it with the gravitas that was implied by the telling of this, the story. And I thought it was important to point out that the gravity of this situation has increased every single time. The stakes get higher every single time.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 44:56 Yeah. And you know, to state the obvious here, even if, if there are four people with guns and one gun fails to fire, there's still three other people with guns, which means if they want to kill him, they can kill him. If we want to be kind of dark about this, if their intention is to kill Russell Nelson at this time, I put 84 on the slide. That's wrong. So I think I was looking at the date when he gave the talk. But you're figuring he's something like 78 years old at this point or something like that.

Nemo 45:22 Actually, no, I think he is 84.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 45:24 No, he is 14 years ago. I did do the math. Right. So he's 80, is an 84 year old man. If you have four armed robbers, they can kill him very easily. Let's just be honest here. This is not an issue of a gun failing. They don't need a gun to kill an 84 year old man. And this is just absurd. Like, this story from what we know, from the contemporaneous accounts to five years later, has grown in ways that only serve to make Russell Nelson and Wendy Nelson look better. And I. And you just. Once you start to see it. Now we see it with two different stories where a mundane. This isn't a mundane story, it's a robbery. I get that. But ordinary robbery in Mozambique, which is horrible, but it's still just a normal robbery, has turned into basically God protecting Russell Nelson, giving Wendy Nelson a special feeling of calm right as this is about to go down, while not protecting Cindy Packard, who's gonna have her arm broken. It just. It just feels like a story that's almost written by an amateur screenwriter who's trying to make like an action movie about a hero. This just doesn't add up in any way. And he's doing it as the prophet of God. Or in this, you know, in this case, I guess he's not quite prophet yet, but it's just. It's absurd.

Nemo 46:32 Yeah. This story, though, is where we get the famous and oft quoted saying, every time a gun misfires, an angel gets its wings.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 46:40 Yeah, yeah, I.

John Dehlin 46:42 It's a Frank Capra reference.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 46:44 Yeah, that one I actually got.

Nemo 46:47 I got that reference.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 46:48 Yeah, that one I got. But, yeah, it's just, you know, and

Nemo 46:51 again, it's like nothing from Nemo. Nemo.

Guest 3 46:53 I did not.

Nemo 46:54 Are you kidding me? You've never seen It's a Wonderful Life? What do you do?

John Dehlin 46:58 Double double Boomer. Double double Boomer. Rfm.

Nemo 47:01 Double Boomer.

Guest 3 47:01 What do we do over here in England? I know, Establish stuff.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 47:06 Wow. Okay.

John Dehlin 47:07 Can I. Can I just say also that there is this theodicy problem of if. If he's going to claim that God would intervene to protect him or to save his, you know, colleagues. What about all the Mormon missionaries that have been hit by cars, that have been robbed, that have been killed?

Guest 4 47:26 We.

John Dehlin 47:26 We interviewed Mormon missionaries who were sexually assaulted. And he doesn't, you know, literally sexually assaulted on their mission as missionaries. Very serious stories. And he has to just. If he's going to claim that God's going to intervene and. And save him and his cohort, he's got to explain why God doesn't intervene on all the. Not just all the Mormon missionaries that do get killed or maimed or assaulted or raped, but also just all the humans on the planet just, you know, kids down the road in the village, that God's not intervening to save them from being raped or molested or Assaulted or abused.

Guest 3 48:07 It's the, it's the implied self aggrandizement, though, because he knows that people are going to believe. Well, of course he would have been saved because he was being raised up to be God's prophet or God's apostle. So he has to survive, whereas other people, that just wasn't there.

John Dehlin 48:20 Yeah, in that sense, I, I see what you're saying, Mike. It's in rfm. It's kind of self serving. Right.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 48:25 It's completely.

John Dehlin 48:26 He's not just, he's not just spinning a story. He's. He's altering a story. And he's not just spinning and altering a story. He's altering it to give himself power and glory amongst his following.

Nemo 48:39 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 48:39 And like, you know, again, I know this is just part of the talk, but Cindy Packard got her arm broken during this thing. She was a hero. She ran out, she warned everybody. They got, they got help. You know, you think Russell Nelson would be like, man, she really saved us. But he hasn't mentioned her because it's not about her, it's about him. These stories, I don't mean to be a jerk, but when you listen to Nelson tell stories about himself, it comes off as a guy who is like, please love me. And these stories are doing that. And if you felt a spiritual confirmation when you hear that story because it's such a miraculous story, what does that tell you about the reliability of those witnesses when you now know that story didn't happen?

John Dehlin 49:14 Yeah. All right, well, I'm calling it. It's. It's Mike. RFM and Nemo 2. Russell M. Nelson, 0. Let's go to the next. Let's go to the next story. This is the big one.

The Flight of Death Miracle Story

Mike (LDS Discussions) 49:25 This is the big one. And this is one that Mormonism Live covered recently. And it's just, it's amazing. So this is the story that is kind of known as the Flight of Death or the Door. I think he gave a talk called Doors of death in 1992. And so this is one where Russell Nelson talks about a flight he took from Salt Lake City. They had to make an emergency landing after one of the engines exploded, leaving the passenger next to him hysterical as he remained completely calm, knowing he was plunging to his death. And so what we want to do first is listen to this clip from his talk From April of 1992, General Conference. The talk was called Doors of Death. So obviously it was about this, this flight.

John Dehlin 50:02 All right, let's play the clip.

Guest 4 50:06 I remember vividly an experience I had as a passenger in a Small two propeller airplane, one of its engines suddenly burst open and caught on fire. The propeller of the flaming engine was starkly stilled as we plummeted in a steep spiral dive down toward the earth. I expected to die. Some of the passengers screamed in hysterical panic. Miraculously, the precipitous dive extinguished the flames. Then, by starting up the other engine, the pilot was able to stabilize the plane and bring us down safely. Throughout that ordeal, though I knew death was coming, my paramount feeling was that I was not afraid to die. I remember a sense of returning home to meet ancestors for whom I had done temple work. I remember my deep sense of gratitude that my sweetheart and I had been sealed eternally to each other and to our children, born and reared in the covenant. I realized that our marriage in the temple was my most important accomplishment. Honors bestowed upon me by men could not approach the inner peace provided by sealings performed in the house of the Lord.

John Dehlin 51:25 Okay, well, that sounds pretty. Pretty miraculous.

Nemo 51:28 He even said it was miraculous. Yeah, even said that. He said, miraculously, the steep dive extinguished the flame. Now, if there had been a flame, it wouldn't be miraculous. That would be standard operating procedure to go into a steep dive to try and extinguish the flame.

John Dehlin 51:43 Okay, yeah.

Guest 3 51:44 If. If this even happened, which, spoiler alert, it didn't, then anything that was done to prevent it is down to the skill of the pilot. It's. This is not miraculous. This is a pilot who avoided a crisis, and he's the one that deserves the credit.

Nemo 52:00 Yeah.

John Dehlin 52:01 All right, so I guess I take there's more to the story, Is that right?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 52:05 Yeah.

John Dehlin 52:06 All right, let's go to the next slide.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 52:07 So we're gonna go a little bit backwards here, but this is at the beginning of this episode. RFM was holding this book heart to heart by Russell Nelson. And this is what he wrote in the preface of his 1979 autobiography. It says, and this is about the need to write this book. So he says. The final nudge to write this book came as I was a passenger in a small airplane plummeting earthward with one of its two engines exploded. I realized then that although both the spiritual and material needs for my family have been provided, I had not left for them a reasonable recapitulation of my life that they could review. The safe emergency landing of that disabled aircraft provided me with the chance I needed. And so it's just. It's a real big difference from the story he's going to tell, what, 13 years later, because it's really a big shift in narrative so, you know, in 1979, he's saying basically that that event. He was thinking about how he needed to write this book in 1992. He's thinking about how he's calm while everyone's hysterical next to him. And the one thing RFM also noted at the beginning of this episode, it's just kind of a bit of a side tangent, is that this is also a book that we recently learned has a 4. I believe it's the foreword from Spencer W. Kimball, and Spencer Kimball's journals were recently released. And there's a note during this time frame and it talks about how Russell Nelson wrote the. The foreword to the book and basically brought it to Spencer Kimball just to sign off on without him actually writing it in the first place. Which I just find funny because it says Nelson brought a suggested forward he has written for me that he would like approval to use in a compilation he has prepared on his life story. He has written a very interesting account of his activities and some which included experiences with me. And I assured him I would read it and give him approval to use it. And there's a note to the side of it that says a fulsome forward for a man to write about himself. And a lot of people have said that I believe Kimball's son would make notes in his journal. So they think Kimball's son was basically taking a shot at Nelson by saying, that's quite a forward to write about yourself, to have someone else sign off on. So.

Guest 3 54:01 Well, yeah, it is.

Nemo 54:03 Yeah.

Guest 3 54:03 And it's this whole idea of he's like, my family were fine, but they just didn't know all the cool stuff I did. And that's sad. So I need to make sure they know about all the cool stuff I did it again. It just builds. If we're building up in layers this sort of narcissistic personality that Russell M. Nelson has, it just adds another layer to that.

Nemo 54:25 Can I just read the first paragraph of this forward that was not, repeat, not written by President Spencer W. Kimball, even though it says forward by President Spencer W. Kimball? Yes, by the way. By the way. I do want to say that I get the fact that lots of times people who are famous or in high position, like President Kimball, they get approached by lots of people to write forwards or whatever, and they're too busy. And they. They may very well say, and often do, just write something up, okay? And let me look at it and it'll be fine because they don't have the time to do it. So it's possible Something like that happened. But here's the first paragraph, which is written by President Nelson about President Nelson's family and himself, but attributed to Spencer Kimball. This book. First paragraph. This book. The engaging record of the life and experiences of Russell Marion Nelson, is a fulfillment of a great dream. In these pages, he has set forth a chronicle of his noble parentage and crystallized the many experiences of himself and his adorable family. This work will bring joy and peace and happiness to its readers. I would have a tough time writing that about myself for someone else to sign up.

John Dehlin 55:40 I would have a hard time writing about myself in third person, just. Period.

Guest 3 55:44 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 55:44 Yeah.

Guest 3 55:44 I don't know if I could write about myself in third person.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 55:47 Yeah, that's. Yeah, it makes a lot of sense, given the. The totality of this episode, that he would write that. But, yeah, you listen to that. Knowing that Nelson wrote it, basically just have it signed off on. It's like when you write a letter of recommendation and you're like. You go to a professor and you're like, I need a letter of recommendation for a job or from a current employer. And it's like, they're the best employee I've ever seen. They come to work early and they leave late. It's just. It's just. It's so cartoonish, especially when you know that the person wrote it for themselves. So are we.

John Dehlin 56:19 Are we okay, Devil's advocate? Are we holding them to too high of a standard? Because I can say I absolutely had at least one professor tell me, write your own letter of recommendation, and I'll sign my name to it like, I've done it.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 56:33 I've done it, too.

John Dehlin 56:34 So what? Well, let's just say a progressive or liberal Mormon says, oh, no, these are just men. They do things just like the rest of us. You're holding them to too high of a standard.

Guest 3 56:44 I mean, that bit's not necessarily as much of the problem as the story that he's telling, which just is patently untrue.

John Dehlin 56:49 Okay. All right.

Guest 3 56:50 Yes, I would say.

John Dehlin 56:51 Okay, so do we.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 56:53 Funny. Honestly. Okay, it's more funny than it is.

John Dehlin 56:55 No, it is a cheesy thing to write a glowing introduction about yourself in third person.

Guest 3 57:02 I think it says. It says more about his personality than it is necessary about his honesty.

John Dehlin 57:06 And honestly, if I. I'm sure people who know him say he's a great guy because that's always the way it is. But honestly, based on what I've seen from him, I can see him doing that. So that seems.

Nemo 57:17 Can I give you a Sneak peek. I'm sorry, please. About what it was that Russell M. Nelson was doing in August and September of 1968. Since we have it on page 33, 35 of his book. Just one paragraph. You're gonna love it. Danzil and I went to London, Paris, Rome, Vatican City, Athens and Israel. Steven Shirley Taylor tended the children. We spent a week. Here we go. We spent a week in the Holy Land and were truly inspired to walk where the Savior had walked. What we felt there does not lend itself to verbal expression or apparently written expression either. We were moved to visit the Yad Vashem. Vashem. Excuse me, where the name, states and identification of the 6 million Jews who were killed in the Holocaust are recorded. The thought occurred to us then, and has done subsequently, that this museum is a vast treasure house for those who will want to do temple work for these dead souls in the future. I'm not sure that diary entry has aged well.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 58:19 No. Yikes.

John Dehlin 58:21 Nemo, you're cringing over there. You're literally physically, visibly cringing.

Guest 3 58:26 Deeply. Unusual. Oh, man, that. That's. That's deeply.

John Dehlin 58:31 Why, Nemo? Why?

Guest 3 58:32 Because what he's doing is he's looking at a terrible mass genocide and going, something in this for us? No, no. Doesn't know. Looking at it, going, oh, isn't that convenient? They've written down the names of all these people that were brutally murdered. That's great. For us again. No, don't do that. That's not okay.

John Dehlin 58:55 Is it also fair to say that when he writes, when he makes that comment about things too sacred to write or speak or whatever, that that's code for I'm a special witness of Christ and I had some theophany with Christ that's so sacred. I can't give you details because I don't want someone to pick apart my. My story later. Like.

Guest 3 59:15 Well, in that book he talks about having a second anointing. I believe it's in that. It's in that autobiography as well. He is his reference to having a second anointing.

Nemo 59:24 Absolutely.

Guest 3 59:26 That book's full of, or seemingly has multiple examples.

John Dehlin 59:28 And the point I'm just making is they really want the. The church membership to believe that they have special congress with God. Yeah.

Guest 3 59:37 They want people to fill in the blanks for themselves in the most faith promoting way possible. So they leave it purposely vague so people can do that.

Nemo 59:43 Yep.

Guest 3 59:44 Yeah.

John Dehlin 59:45 All right. Should we go to the next slide?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 59:47 Yeah, I think so. Is this the slide, Mike with Next slide.

John Dehlin 59:52 Okay. Right here. There we go.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 59:53 Yeah. So now, this is a video that the church puts together in 2011. And this is just like one of those things where when you watch this, the first thing that comes to mind is Nelson is again making himself the hero by contrasting his perfect calmness with the hysterical panic of the other passengers. And, you know, if you watch. As you watch this video, listen to how he describes the. The engine bursting open and catching on fire. And then I also want you to kind of listen to the music in the background and how the church uses visual and audio to also generate that spiritual feeling you're going to have when you watch this. This. This later retelling from Russell Nelson.

Guest 4 1:00:35 I was in a small airplane, and all of a sudden the engine on the wing caught fire. It exploded, and burning oil was poured all over the right side of the airplane, and we started to dive toward the earth. We were spinning down to our death. Oh, this woman across the isle, I just was so sorry for her. She was just absolutely, uncontrollably hysterical. And I was calm. I was totally calm. Even though I knew I was going down to my death, I was ready to meet my maker. We didn't crash. We didn't die. The spiral dive extinguished the flame. The pilot got control and started the other engine up, and we made an emergency landing out in the field. But I thought through that experience, if you've got a faith, you can handle difficulties knowing that with an eternal perspective, that all will be well.

John Dehlin 1:01:40 Okay, God and Jesus gives you hope. What's that? What's that? Rfm?

Nemo 1:01:46 I just always like the part when he says, we didn't die.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:01:50 I just like the part when the girl's just screaming uncontrollably right next to him. And then you see Nelson in the background just looking around like, you know, he's waiting for someone to bring him a glass of water or something.

Nemo 1:01:59 I know.

John Dehlin 1:01:59 Would you.

Nemo 1:02:00 Would you quit interrupting the screaming woman? I'm enjoying my life passing before my eyes. Yeah.

Guest 3 1:02:05 I can't believe the seat service has ended so suddenly.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:02:08 Oh, my goodness. Yeah, so, I mean, it's just one of the things I love about that video is. Is just not. Yeah, the. The music you hear is just so. You know, we talk about this, and it's not just religion, but music is such a manipulative thing. And the church owns. Oh, my goodness. What's it called? Heart cell. The heart. Heart cell model, where they basically talk about how they can use music to elicit responses from the viewers. And this is one of the ways that the church is so effective when they show a story like this to members because it helps you to feel that spirit. And the, the, the visuals they show with, like, the woman screaming and Nelson just say, all of that just contributes to making the story just so grand and so miraculous. And as we'll see, it's a little light on getting the details right really quickly.

Nemo 1:02:55 Oh, I'm sorry, John, Go ahead.

John Dehlin 1:02:56 No, please.

Nemo 1:02:57 It's interesting. The video does not track his story. If you just looked at the video, you've got a plane that's encountering some very minor turbulence.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:03:05 Yep.

Nemo 1:03:07 And I think that's probably a lot more closely resembles what it is that actually happened.

Guest 3 1:03:13 Yep.

John Dehlin 1:03:14 Maybe the church can't afford the special effects of the spiraling of the plane spiraling to its death and just can't

Nemo 1:03:20 afford that at all.

Guest 3 1:03:20 John, to your point, John, about, about, you know, on its face, this is. Yes, faith in an afterlife brings you calm in moments of distress. And I think that's a, that's a valid point to make, and I don't want to take that away from anyone. I think the overarching point is that he is using an event that didn't happen to try and make that point, and he shouldn't be doing that.

Nemo 1:03:42 Yeah.

John Dehlin 1:03:42 I was just also going to note that I. I've talked to some of my believing family and none of them want to die. I'm just not. You know, even if somebody believes in theory, in an afterlife, I haven't really met anyone who's excited to go there now. If they are, it's usually because they're living a life that's tragic and they're miserable and they want to accelerate their demise to escape their pain and suffering. But, but that idea that he was at peace and he was ready to die, I mean, it's possible. I'm sure there are people that have died that way, but for the Mormon, the believing Mormons, I know they still want to make this life last as long as. As it can.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:04:26 Yeah. I mean, it's like I thought the same thing when I was watching it, because I thought even if I was sure that when I died I'd be reunited with my ancestors or whatever, I'd still be like, super upset that I was going to miss my kids growing up, what it's going to happen with my wife, what's going to happen with my siblings, my parents, whatever. It's so this idea that you just be super calm and like. Well, but it is what it is. It's like, no, you might feel some inner peace, maybe after some time passes. But you would have that initial reaction of, what am I going to miss? What? You know, and it's just, it's so. It's so cartoonish the way he tells it, which again is what we're seeing in these stories. It's a pattern.

John Dehlin 1:05:03 All right, well, let's go to the next slide.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:05:05 Yeah. And so as we talked about with other stories, this becomes a little bit more exaggerated over the years and it's going to cause a problem. So there are some differences from the earlier retellings of the story and every difference, as we've seen with the first vision, the priesthood restoration, all of it makes the story more miraculous. So in this version, there's oil that is poured all over the right side of the airplane as he began to plunge to his death. And that's important to note because oil leaves a lot of marks on the plane. Nelson also, again makes himself even more amazing as he says he felt sorry for the woman next to him as she was absolutely uncontrollably hysterical while he remained perfectly calm in those few moments. And just as with the first two stories, the problem is when you get into the contemporary records of the incident, the details don't line up. And so the really good folks over@discussmormonism.com on their message board, they spent I think a couple of months really trying to figure this out. And they finally located records of the event. And this is what the report from the flight states. And this is a report from November 11, 1976. It says second incidents occurred on November 11, 1976 involving Piper PA 31 and 74, 4985. Pilot experienced rough engine on scheduled flight between Salt Lake City and St. George, passing three passengers on board. Engine was feathered and precautionary landing made at Delta, Utah per instructions. Company manual. Investigation revealed cylinder based studs were sheared and as result of occurrence, SkyWest changed maintenance procedures by checking torque studs at each 100 hour inspection. No damage to aircraft, no injuries to crew or passengers.

John Dehlin 1:06:48 Whoa, now wait a minute. That report's very different from the story he's been telling in the previous slide.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:06:54 Yeah, just a bit.

John Dehlin 1:06:55 Okay. Can we repeat that? Nemo, do you want to repeat it for, just for effect?

Guest 3 1:07:00 Sure. So just the crucial point.

John Dehlin 1:07:03 Yeah, the crucial point.

Guest 3 1:07:03 Yeah. Okay, so SkyWest changed maintenance procedures by checking torque studs at each 100 hour inspection. No damage to aircraft, no injuries to crew or passengers.

John Dehlin 1:07:15 Did he say that an engine blew up and burst into flames and was

Guest 3 1:07:19 spoiling, burning Oil and fuel spewed over the wing of the aircraft, engulfing it in flames.

John Dehlin 1:07:26 And. Wait, does the flight report say no damage to aircraft?

Guest 3 1:07:29 It does indeed, John. It does.

John Dehlin 1:07:31 Okay, I think there's a problem here.

Nemo 1:07:34 It also says a precautionary landing at the Delta airport, not an emergency landing, which are two very different things. In a farmer's field.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:07:44 In a farmer's field.

Guest 3 1:07:44 Yep.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:07:45 Yeah.

Guest 3 1:07:45 I mean, I can give Nelson calling it an emergency landing versus a precautionary landing. That's fine. But it would very clearly be listed as an emergency landing if the things that Nelson had described had occurred, because that is an emergency, not merely a precaution.

John Dehlin 1:08:00 So what are the. Can someone list all the lies that have been told in the story?

Guest 3 1:08:05 Spiral dive engine exploding, fuel spewing, damage to aircraft, possible injuries to other people.

John Dehlin 1:08:12 Also, that makes me wonder whether the woman next to him was screaming hysterically and whether he was Mr. Calm in contrast to her, although he may have been.

Guest 3 1:08:24 Some people find turbulence incredibly upsetting, Right? So some people. She may have been. She may have been. And he may have been calm, because that would be the rational reaction to some light engine trouble, is remaining calm.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:08:36 And that's true. I mean, I've been on a flight before where there's really rough turbulence, and you hit a big bump and you hear, like, half the plane go, you know, and it. That you keep. Like. Especially some of the kids start to cry because they're like, what the crap's going on? So, yeah, it's possible the person next to them was grabbing stuff tight and making some noise. I mean, it. That makes sense when you've got maybe some shaking that you're not expecting. But the way you're telling it is like this. You're using her as the foil to your plot, right? You're trying to make her the. The one that's gonna make you look better. And I think that's where you kind of have to look at it with the same light. You look at these other stories and go. When you start to see the pattern of what Nelson does, it seems to indicate that he's very open to using other people to make his stories become all the better.

John Dehlin 1:09:16 And the lying is horrific. But just this constant. This constant need. When I tell a story, I want to glorify, like, the reason I started Mormon stories is I wanted to support other people telling their stories. Like, this impulse of telling a story to make yourself look good, it just feels gross to me. Even the people that I respect, even if they make a Self referential story. They usually are self deprecating and they're trying to elevate someone else in the story. They're not constantly trying to make themselves look good in their stories. That's just douchey.

Guest 3 1:09:51 It is.

John Dehlin 1:09:52 It's a little douchey.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:09:54 It is. And you know, we all have stories where we retell them and we exaggerate it. But usually when you exaggerate it, you are letting people around, you know, you're exaggerating it. You know, I'll give you guys a quick story. We visited my. My in laws in Prague. They were on a senior mission and we were taking the. Whatever they call their subway system. And I was holding my. My kid because it was pretty crowded and he didn't have a bar to grab. So I was holding him with my arms. I had one arm on the pole, one arm on him. We come to the subway stop and I immediately reached out of my pockets and my phone's gone. And there was a guy next to me that kept brushing up against me, which I thought was weird. So I jump off this. I really did. I jumped off the subway car and I started chasing this guy. I yell back to my wife, I'll be right back. Which is stupid because I can't speak the language. I don't even know where I'm at. I run to this dude and I'm like, give me my phone. All of a sudden I hear a noise. He threw the phone like 10ft away. So when I looked at my phone, he ran the other way. I grabbed my phone, I ran. I got back on the subway car before it took off and I was like, I can't believe I pulled that off. It was so stupid to go after some random guy. When I retell that story to people, I exaggerate it even more than that. But what I'm doing, and I'm saying it with this tone of like, you know, it's cartoonish. Like, I tell it like I'm John Wick. And the point is that it's a story. I shouldn't. I actually shouldn't have jumped off the subway car. But when I retell that story, I don't tell it like, using other people to make myself look better. I'm telling it like, yeah, it was stupid and I exaggerated because it's funny. But here Nelson is. What's that?

Scrutinizing the Spiral Dive Plane Story

Guest 3 1:11:19 I said, that's it. The crux of the story is that you were a Muppet. You shouldn't have jumped off the subway. Card gift after your phone.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:11:25 Whereas Nelson is using these exaggerations to make other people think that he is chosen of God. And I think that is where you cross that line from exaggerations and stories are going to happen. We all know that. But exaggerations and stories to manipulate other people to be more loyal to you, that's where there's a problem.

Nemo 1:11:43 Let me add that there were a number of pilots who contacted me and Bill and showed up on the Discuss Mormonism board. And all of them that expressed an opinion on this issue said, nah, that didn't happen, not the way it's described. And one of the key things that they all focused in on as the most absurd was President Nelson's statement that they went into a spiral dive, and then just before they hit the ground, the pilot started the other engine up, the one that wasn't in flames. That means the other engine went out. Okay, here's the thing I had to learn.

Guest 3 1:12:25 I forgot that detail.

Nemo 1:12:27 Right. What? I'm sorry.

Guest 3 1:12:28 I forgot that detail. That one. That one's the one that cracks me up the most. I forgot that one.

Nemo 1:12:32 Right. You've got twin engines, and the deal is they're not connected to each other. There are two separate fuel lines that go to each engine. So if one has a problem, it doesn't take the other one out. Because if you've got no engines, you are in a lot of trouble. If you've got one engine working, you're fine. You can keep flying on forever. I mean, you should probably land.

Guest 3 1:12:58 They're designed to fly on one engine. Most people, modern aircraft, right?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:13:00 Yeah.

Nemo 1:13:01 And you feather the props, and that was in the. What was the NTSB National Traffic Safety Board entry. And you feather the props, which means you turn them straight ahead on the engine that's not working anymore. So there's no drag. And then you just sort of. Yaw is the word they use. You yaw the plane to the side and then you keep traveling in that direction forward. But, yeah, they are designed that way. And so once the fire goes on, if there is indeed a fire, what you do is you cut the fuel to that engine. You hit the fuel line so that there's no more fuel going into it to continue the problem with the fire and feeding the fire, but you don't hit the fuel line to the other engine that's not having a problem. The fact that President Nelson says that before they hit the ground, he turns on the other engine necessarily means that the other engine went out as part of this dive. The odds against that are astronomical. And when I Say that. I mean, both engines having trouble on the same brief flight. Yeah, yeah.

John Dehlin 1:14:08 Well, I. Maybe I'm missing something here. Wouldn't both engines be running and then one fails but the other is still running?

Nemo 1:14:15 Yeah, yeah, that's what I was trying to describe in my own unartful way.

John Dehlin 1:14:19 Yeah.

Nemo 1:14:19 Or in artful.

John Dehlin 1:14:20 Yeah. And so you just shut this one off. You know, you stabilize, shut this one off, and then fly with the remaining engine.

Nemo 1:14:26 And apparently the problem wasn't that it blew up or was in flames. The problem was with the studs, and it was probably rattling because they were starting to come a little bit loose. So they had to change the.

Guest 3 1:14:36 Yeah, I think they described it as a rough engine or something.

Nemo 1:14:38 Yes. Yeah, it was flying rough.

Guest 3 1:14:40 Yeah.

Nemo 1:14:40 So they. I'm sure they cut the fuel to it and just went on the other one. And the pilot's telling them all this stuff. I mean, the pilot is right there. It's a small engine, even in a big aircraft. The pilot comes over the intercom and says, okay, everybody, this is what we're going to be doing. Lets everybody know in advance, because the last thing you want is, I don't know, people getting hysterical.

Guest 3 1:14:58 Yep.

Nemo 1:14:59 So you let them know it's all fine. And all this pilot has to do is turn over and talk to the people who are right behind him. And of course he's going to do that. And don't even get me started on the point of no return. Okay. And the High and the mighty.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:15:11 Yeah, I forgot about that part. Yep. Yeah. So that was.

John Dehlin 1:15:15 Wait, do our listeners and viewers know what you're talking about?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:15:17 Probably not. I don't know the earlier one.

John Dehlin 1:15:19 No. What's that,

Nemo 1:15:24 Mike? Why don't you tell us about that? The High and mighty and the point of no return.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:15:28 So this is from the Mormonism Live episode, and in one of Nelson's recountings, he says that the pilot actually comes over the air to say we're past the point of no return. Which would be a really weird thing to say to passengers. Like, hey, guys, we're past the point of no return. Like, why would you say that? And so I think RFM pointed out that more likely the pilot might have said we're over halfway to our destination. And I believe the reference. Now, this is where I might misremember it. I believe the reference of point of return is when you're over water or something like that, and you can no longer turn back to land. And again, that would not be the case when you're flying from Salt Lake City to wherever he's going.

Nemo 1:16:03 And the reason I say the High and the mighty, the 1950s famous John Wayne movie, right?

Guest 4 1:16:07 Yep.

Nemo 1:16:07 Right. With the haunting score by Dmitry Tiankin. Okay. But anyway, the whole plot device there is the plane being piloted by John Wayne and I think co piloted by Robert Stack maybe. But they're coming across from Hawaii to San Francisco. You got no place to land except the water, and that's not a good idea, but it's your only option. So the point of no return means when you have gone so far over the water that you now have not enough fuel, if there's a problem to turn around and get back where you started. The point of no return means you are committed now irrevocably to getting to your point of destination, which is San Francisco. And it's a big deal in the show and it's a real expression that pilots use. It's just that it doesn't have any meaning when you're over land. And there are several intermediate places you could touch down, like, I don't know, the Delta Airport between Salt Lake City and St. George, which is where he was going to give the opening prayer for a service or whatever you would call it. Where they were, I think, appointing or inaugurating a new president.

Guest 3 1:17:18 It was the inauguration of the president of Dixie College. Yeah, he was given the opening prayer.

John Dehlin 1:17:26 And I think a John Wayne reference lands you your third Bumo Boomer award for today, rfm. And I think Boomers are cool. So I mean that in all the positive ways.

Nemo 1:17:36 But it's very ominous the way he uses it. The pilot came over and said, well, we just passed the point of no return. And Russell says, well, I thought that was an odd thing for him to say. Well, yes, it would be a very odd thing for him to say.

Guest 3 1:17:51 Very strange. It may induce hysteria, in fact.

Nemo 1:17:55 Yes.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:17:57 Yeah. Imagine. Imagine a pilot like on a Southwest flight getting over like, you know, two hours into a flight and like we're past the point no return. And everyone's like, why would you. Like, there's no. You would never say.

Guest 3 1:18:06 I mean, the Southwest pilots will say that when you take off, right? I mean, that's, that's just flying Southwest.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:18:11 Yeah, that's true. That's a fair point. But still. Yeah. It would be irresponsible of a pilot to say that to. To passengers because of course you're not. There's nothing positive that comes from saying that. Even if you say it as a joke, you'd still be like, that's Odd. So, yeah, it makes no sense.

John Dehlin 1:18:25 Well, let's find out how a precautionary landing becomes a miraculous one.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:18:29 Yeah, and so one of the things that some people said is maybe that flight record didn't match the flight that Nelson took. And so the reason we know that it does match is that it was the day before Nelson's scheduled talk, and there are no other incidents in that entire time frame. It also matches because they mentioned that the plane landed in Delta, Utah, which Nelson mentions in the very same biography that had the Woman in the Hat story removed. It says, miraculously, the free fall extinguished the fire, and in the nick of time, the pilot was able to start the left engine, regain control of the plane, and guide it to an emergency landing in a farmer's field not far from Delta, Utah. And so everything lines up. And what the record tells us is that the plane did not have damage, which, as we said, rejects the idea that it exploded with oil shooting all over the right side. The report states they made a precautionary landing due to engine feathering, which is a technique used by pilots when one of the two engines is failing to operate, as RFM noted. I think it's a tactic where they can kind of shift the. The angle of the propeller so that it gets. It doesn't create that. That drag from the air. And so while Nelson claims that an emergency landing was made in a farmer's field outside of Delta, Utah, the actual records show that the plane simply made a precautionary landing at the Delta, Utah airport with no damage to the aircraft. Instead of a spiraling flight to their death, the pilot used a technique of engine feathering during a precautionary landing so that they could have the plane inspected. It's just another instance where you have, you know, a story that there's a shell to it that's true, but the shell that's true is just fairly ordinary. And the miraculous parts are all completely invented after the fact years later.

Guest 3 1:20:04 Yeah, I mean, you've got to. You've got to realize, though, these guys, they come from a tradition where miraculous stories have been told about all their predecessors as apostles, right? There's. There's miraculous story after miraculous story about the early days of the church. And so if your life is failing to live up to that, members are expecting those sorts of things to continue because God is an unchanging God. So you've kind of got to give members some miracles.

John Dehlin 1:20:27 Otherwise, you're just an old dude. Yeah, right. Yeah, you're just an old dude that Someone picked to be a leader, and then you got.

Guest 4 1:20:35 You.

John Dehlin 1:20:36 You live. Yeah, lived.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:20:37 Your.

John Dehlin 1:20:37 Your peers. And so you had top seniority in the quorum, and. And that's why you're a prophet.

Guest 3 1:20:43 Your only achievement is outliving everyone else.

Nemo 1:20:45 Right.

John Dehlin 1:20:46 God. God hasn't necessarily found any favor in you, per se. Yeah, yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:20:50 That's just it.

Nemo 1:20:51 And by the way, without going into a lot of detail about these in NTSB records, the National Traffic Safety Board records that we're talking about, this is positively identified. This has to be the one that it's talking about. Number one, there was only one airline that ran flights between Salt Lake City and St. George at the time. And there were two other flights, one maybe several days before this, another several days after, which have completely different details. They don't match at all. So this has got to be it. The only possibility. The only possibility to save President Nelson's credibility in the story is to hypothesize that there was a flight that this actually did happen on, but that nobody reported it to the ntsb. So there's no record of it. Because if they had reported it, there definitely would have been a record of it. An emergency landing. Yes. This is just a precautionary landing, and it had to be reported to the ntsb. And the fact is that if you are a pilot and you have an emergency landing and you fail to report it to the ntsb, you're gonna lose your pilot's license.

Guest 3 1:21:58 Lose your wings. Yeah, I was gonna say, is it not a. Is it not a federal law? Like a federal legal requirement that you report these things?

Nemo 1:22:04 Yes.

Guest 3 1:22:05 So, yeah, yeah.

Nemo 1:22:07 So it's very unlikely that that theory is correct is all I'm saying.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:22:11 I've heard that before, too, where they'll say, well, they probably just lost the records. And I was like, well, you know, maybe Russell Nelson went to the ntsb. He's like, I gotta show us the dancehall. And they're like, we can't let you have it. He went again. He's like, I need you to let me show it. They're like, no. And he went. The third time. They're like, oh, power three. We gotta give it to you. And then Danzel burned it and said, if it really happened, they could produce a record again. And then they never could. Yeah, it's a really bad 116 page.

John Dehlin 1:22:33 See the 116 page pages episode of LDS discussions.

Nemo 1:22:39 Yeah, I'm seeing that Nemo has now changed my subtitle on my name from. What was it? Brave Sir. Robin to winner of three Boomer Awards. Nemo is very busy over there in his corner of the world.

John Dehlin 1:22:53 He's got to earn his keep. He's earning his keep.

Nemo 1:22:55 He's reminding me more and more of Gus the lovable chimney sweep.

John Dehlin 1:22:59 Oh, that's getting you four. Is that a Mary Poppins reference?

Nemo 1:23:03 Simpsons.

John Dehlin 1:23:04 Oh, okay. No, you don't get. You don't get a Boomer Award for Simpsons reference. Sorry, sorry. Rfm. You're gonna stick with three for now? Okay, well, I'm gonna just. I'm. I'm doing a running tally, and I think the. The flight records alone, in addition to the ridiculousness of the technicalities of the story, take us to LDS discussions. RFM and Nemo 3. Russell M. Nelson, 0. So he's got one more chance, one more chance to redeem himself in this story. Mike, do you want to take us into the November 2015 revelation?

Nelson and the November 2015 LGBT Policy Change

Guest 3 1:23:43 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:23:43 And this is when we covered in our episodes on Revelation, but this one's a little bit different because it pertains to the church's November 2015 LGBT policy of exclusion. And basically what happens is the church's handbook leaks out. It gets a lot of bad publicity. It reveals all the harsh changes towards LGBT members and their children. So Russell Nelson kind of takes it upon himself to declare that the handbook changes with a direct revelation from God himself. And so, you know, by itself, you can't prove the story wrong because we weren't there. But where Nelson goes a bit too far is kind of talking about how all of the other apostles there feel a confirmation in the process itself. So if we play this clip, then we'll kind of go into one of the insider accounts we have as to how this all went down.

Guest 4 1:24:26 This prophetic process was followed in 2012 with the change in minimum age for missionaries and again with the recent additions to the Church's handbook, consequent to the legalization of same sex marriage in some countries. Filled with compassion for all and especially for the children, we wrestled at length to understand the Lord's will in this matter. Evermore mindful of God's plan of salvation and of his hope for eternal life for each of his children, we considered countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise. We met repeatedly in the temple in fasting and prayer and sought further direction and inspiration. And then, when the Lord inspired his prophet, President Thomas S. Monson, to declare the mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord, each of us during that sacred moment felt a spiritual confirmation. It was our privilege as apostles to sustain what had been revealed to President Monster. Revelation from the Lord to his servants is a sacred process and so is your privilege of receiving personal revelation.

Nemo 1:26:09 Well, I know what my personal revelation just told me about his revelation.

Guest 3 1:26:13 Did you see the body language on him when he says a prophet? Yeah, Thomas says like he, he really stands up to attention, lifts the chest

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:26:21 out and it's almost like he rehearsed

John Dehlin 1:26:25 this talk in front of a mirror and compassion for all. It, it feels very rehearsed, the emotionality, like why do they have to speak in this type of tone? Why can't they just speak like normal people?

Guest 3 1:26:38 And again, I don't know if we've got it in the slides, but later on when he reverses this policy, he says whenever the children of God weep for any reason and does this whole overdramatic look up to God in the sky, we weep sort of thing, it all feels very calculated and very forced.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:26:58 Well, this was because this is when they're under a lot of fire for this policy and Nelson's giving a very public talk about it. So of course these words are chosen carefully, as you could tell from the way he talks. And they need to make it look like revelation from God because they need the members basically to sit down and shut up. So they need members to stop thinking they want the church, you know, it's this policy versus doctrine, but they want them to think it's a policy from God and not just policy. And so yeah, this, there's a purpose to this talk and Nelson has his purposes, the church has other purposes. But in this case they're going to intersect because Nelson needs people to believe if it comes from a prophet that is from God. Because Nelson also knows he's going to be prophet, you know, coming up soon after months and passes. So it's very self serving to him as well.

Nemo 1:27:39 Right. There were a couple things that I noted at the time. First of which was this was in January 2016 when he's talking about the prior November and he specifically indefinitely labels it as a revelation, which had not been done up to that time. And I remember voicing the question at the time. Well, we've got conference coming in three months, conference is coming up and I am going to wait with bated breath to see if any of the other apostles that President Nelson says were engaged in all of these meetings and fastings and prayings and considerations about the policy backed him up on his story. None of them did. Much to my surprise, none of the apostles came forward and mentioned anything about it, the cheese stands alone. Yep. So that was one thing about it. And I can't remember the second thing, but maybe it'll come to me.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:28:35 Yeah, no, it fits. I mean, and that's the thing. We talked. So there was an episode we did. I think it was on Revelation. And you know the story about, oh my gosh, I can't remember who it is. Someone's questioning when they're doing the Book of Commandments. And like these, these revelations read really horribly. And Joseph Smith's like, I just got a revelation from God. He wants you to try to do it and if you could do better, then you could do better. And they all sit there and they're trying to. I think it's William McClellan is trying to write a revelation and they all realize it's not from God. And so therefore Joseph Smith must be getting them from God. And Russell Nelson, I think is. He'd be the one guy in that room that be like, yeah, I could write one in the voice of God. Because Russell Nelson has that mindset. I think he would absolutely be able to do it. Whereas a lot of other people, a lot of other leaders in the church today are not willing to step out as far as Nelson did because they know full well that what Nelson's doing here is not being truthful. And so they're not willing to do it. But Nelson does not seem to have the problem with exaggerating or fabricating stories in order to elevate both himself and the church. And I think, you know, that, that reminds me of that earlier story because I think Nelson in that room would have been like, yeah, I could definitely write a revelation from God and he would have tried.

Guest 3 1:29:33 But he doesn't have the same hang ups.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:29:35 No, he doesn't seem to have that hang up about calling things from God. Whereas someone like Gordon B. Hinckley I think would have been, would not have gone out and been like, yeah, it was revelation. You've been like, yeah, it's a policy. It's a, you know, whatever, but.

Nemo 1:29:45 And there's some people would call that hang up a conscience.

Guest 3 1:29:48 Yes, some would. He wouldn't. He would, he would call. I don't know what he'd call it. It's interesting. If you go to the, the DNC Institute manual from 2002 under the law of common consent, it says that not only are church officers sustained by common consent, but this same principle operates for policies, major decisions, acceptance of new scripture and other things that affect the lives of the saints. So it's interesting that you mentioned that conference was coming up, rfm, because really, members should have then had a chance to be part of a common consent vote to adopt this new policy towards children. And they never were given that opportunity. So not only were not all the apostles involved when they should have been, but the members of the church should have also been involved in this decision and weren't.

Nemo 1:30:31 This statement by President Nelson is also important because he tells us explicitly the reason for this policy. It's not up to guesswork. He tells us that the reason they did this policy, they created this policy, whatever that process really looked like was consequent or because of the legal. What was it consequent to? The legalization of same sex marriage in some countries? Well, it had. It had just happened in the United States the summer before. He's talking about the United States. But regardless, he says it was made consequent to the legalization of same sex marriage. So we don't have to look at the timing and say it's obvious that that's why they did this. It was a reaction and an overreaction at that to the, the Oberfeld decision by the Supreme Court from a few months before November of 2015, when they snuck it into the policy. And thank goodness for John Dehlin and his contacts in his show where it was able to be leaked to the world, because honestly, John, that was huge. Of all the things you've done podcasting, some things are more important than others. Like anybody that's right up there with the top things that you've done.

Was the Same-Sex Policy Actually Revelation

John Dehlin 1:31:44 Well, thanks. And it's. There's something just structurally skeezy about him claiming that this was revelation, that this decision was revelation because. Because, number one, the revelation itself, the policy itself is so egregious. For those who have never been Mormon, who don't know what we're talking about, about this is. This is a quote, revelation, which really was a change in policy that basically declared legal same sex marriage as being worse than pedophilia or rape or sexual abuse. Why? Because the first thing the policy did is require a mandatory disciplinary council, which means excommunication for anyone entering into committed same sex love. And that's just, that's just abominable on face value. The. The Church Handbook of Instructions did not require excommunication for rape, did not require excommunication for pedophilia or child abuse or for all sorts of heinous acts. It would always be up to the discretion of the bishop and the stake president as to whether or not you know as to whether or not they needed to even hold a disciplinary council, let alone excommunicate them. But this promoted legal same sex love as, as, as basically the worst of all sins. And if that weren't enough, everyone should know that this policy went on to say that the children of same sex married couples, even if, even if the, it started in a mixed orientation marriage and then that, that mixed orientation married couple got divorced and then the husband, for example, the gay husband, went on to marry another gay man. Even the, you know, even the children that were born under those circumstances wouldn't be allowed to get babies blessings, wouldn't be allowed to get baptized, wouldn't be allowed to advance in the levels of the priesthood. If they were young men, the only way they could ever become members would be if they were 18. Then if only they denounce the marriage of their parent, would they be allowed to get baptized and become a member in full standing. That is such an outrageously hateful and heinous policy. It bears belief that he would claim that God our Father in heaven, that Jesus Christ, who is no respecter of persons, that those two celestial beings would be the authors of such a policy. Because when he claims that this policy came from revelation, he's claiming that God and Jesus were the authors of this horrible, despicable policy. So that's the bigger problem that I have, that they're blaming God for their despicable bigoted acts.

Nemo 1:34:41 Yes. And the good news is God changed his mind after three and a half years.

John Dehlin 1:34:45 Yeah, yeah. Because it's such an important revelation that it can't even stand four years. Should we, should we go to the actual account?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:34:53 Yeah.

John Dehlin 1:34:54 All right, let's go to it.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:34:56 So this is where things get interesting because we then get to learn that this is not how it happened. And historian Greg Prince gives an interview with Peggy Fletcher Stash Stack for her Mormon Land podcast. And Prince had spoken with Tom Christofferson, who is the brother of Apostle Todd Christofferson. So we get an inside account of what happened. And to make this even more important, regarding his particular policy, Tom Kristofferson is an openly gay member of the church. And so Prince tells us that this was not a revelation that was received in the presence of the apostles, as Russell M. Nelson says, but it was a statement that was presented to Thomas Monson, which was then put to an up and down vote without debate among the apostles. And so I don't know if Nemo or someone else wants to read these two paragraphs. This is Gregory Prince's Insider account of what went down.

Guest 3 1:35:43 According to everybody I spoke to, including some general authorities, this was the church's response to Obergeffel vs Hodges, the Supreme Court decision in June of the same year that had legalized same sex marriage. I think it caught the church off guard and I think there was some scrambling to figure out, well, what do we do now, given that we have an article of faith that says we will obey and sustain the laws of the land? So this happened, whoever did it amongst the 12, took it into President Monson and as I understand it, presented it as a package saying this is what we need to do. At that time, it was an open secret that President Monson had sunk fairly deep into dementia. And people I talked to in the medical community who weren't his primary care physicians but who knew what was going on, said he was not capable at that time of having formulated this decision. So his response, whatever it was, was something of a reflex, and that was the go ahead. But what Tom Kristofferson said that evening, so this is now Thursday evening, he said he had spoken to his brother Todd earlier and that Todd had told him that Tuesday morning was the first he had known about this policy and that it was presented to the 12 as an up and down vote without debate.

John Dehlin 1:36:58 So where are the lies there?

Guest 3 1:37:01 Oh, the idea that, you know, they all felt the spirit and witnessed the truthfulness of it, and we witnessed as our prophet, Thomas S. Monson, knelt in prayer, etc, etc.

John Dehlin 1:37:10 And if he's got dementia, how is Thomas S. Monson receiving this revelation if he like can't even order his own root beer, you know?

Nemo 1:37:16 Yeah, yeah. Once again, we're back to mash, aren't we? This is Radar putting the papers in front of Colonel Henry Blake for him to sign mindlessly.

Guest 4 1:37:23 Yes.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:37:24 Yeah. I mean, basically this is, you know, Monson doesn't have the mental capability to craft any kind of real statement. And so basically you would assume, like Oakes and Nelson and them are coming up to him with a statement. They're saying, this is what we need to do. They put up to an up or down vote last second, no debate, and they vote. And Nelson now is basically going. Because I think a lot of people think Nelson's fingerprints are on this. I think a lot of people think obviously Oakes would be because he's very openly anti lgbt. And so Nelson now is going out and he's trying to not just sell this policy, but he's trying to sell the idea that it's a prophetic thing because he knows he's gonna be the next prophet, which is again, very self serving to himself,

Nemo 1:38:02 as most self serving things are.

Guest 3 1:38:04 Yeah.

Nemo 1:38:05 Yes, but, but honestly, it's not just the prayer, right? It's elaborate. We met repeatedly all the apostles, President Nelson tells us, all of us apostles, we met repeatedly in the temple, fasting and praying. We considered countless permutations and combinations of how things could happen, and we went to the Lord. None of that happened. According to the story relayed from D. Todd Christofferson to his brother Tom to Greg Prince. Now, Greg Prince, I've read a lot of his stuff. I have no problem taking his word for this story. He's very accurate in what he says. He is not prone, like some people to embellishment. So I have no problem taking his word for this. Tom, I don't know him. I expect he probably said it pretty straightforwardly. We do have to go back through a number of people to get back to D. Todd Kristofferson, but I think the provenance is pretty good on this story and I'm inclined to accept it as accurate.

John Dehlin 1:39:07 Yeah. And many people view this actually as a power play because if, now, if, if Monson was truly experiencing dementia, which was true five to ten years before this time, actually, he had been dealing with dementia for a long, long time. That means that whoever was the senior president of the Quorum of the twelve Apostles was the one who is really behind this. So to me, it makes sense that this was sort of a pet project that Nelson and or Oaks decided that they wanted to ram through taking advantage of Monson's state of being in dementia. And the evidence seems to bear that out. Rfm, you were kind enough to mention the fact that actively serving bishopric member leaked this policy to me. Did the church, you know, leaders receive this revelation, then decide to read it in General Conference so that all the members would know? No, what they did is they made some legalistic policy change in the church's handbook of instructions and just hoped that no one would notice and that this policy would be quietly enforced. But if you're getting this grand majestic revelation, why aren't you announcing it in general conference? Getting all the media involved? Why aren't you adding it as an appendage declaration? Three of the scriptures. That's what you do when you get a majestic revelation. You don't secretly and snidely insert it into a handbook of instructions while your prophet is experiencing dementia, claim that it's a prophetic revelation and then, and then, you know, try and pass it off as just a Little policy change. Right.

Guest 3 1:40:50 Like I said, it should have come up for a common consent vote. I mean, the last thing that was done for the 1978 lifting of the priesthood ban. And I think it's interesting that the church has moved to an electronic handbook now. It's purely digital, which means that people can't then go through old copies and be like, well hang on, it's changed here, it's changed here. They can just sneak these changes in. It will just become an evolving live document over time. And so people have got to keep on top of it to see where these changes are happening.

Nemo 1:41:16 Yes, they treated this revelation like it was something they were ashamed of and they should have been ashamed of it. But if you're ashamed of a revelation, then maybe you should double check on whether it's really a revelation.

John Dehlin 1:41:30 Yeah, yeah, yeah. And not only is the way that they rolled it out so sneakily and underhanded evidence that, that Nelson's story is false again, the fact that they rolled it back just within four years later is I think the death blow to the claim that this is revelation.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:41:49 The thing I always say is they say that God knew that Joseph smith would lose 116 pages, so he had a second set of plates prepared thousands of years earlier for that exact scenario, but did not know that the November 15th policy was going to fail in three and a half years. And those are the things we were discussing. Like you see those inconsistencies, like yeah, this is all pointing to a very clear conclusion. But yeah, it, it makes no sense.

Guest 3 1:42:08 And, and Renlund has said recently in conference that we should not pray about things that the prophet has already spoken on. So then when Russell M. Nelson starts to say that they were praying and fasting and pleading to know what to do, well, they shouldn't have been because the prophet had already spoken and said that children of same sex couples could not members end off, case closed. That's the problem with the things that Renlund says and generally this idea of wants to the prophet spoken, the debate's over because. Well, how does that allow for the continuing changing of things like that they need to have in order to make mess ups like this be fixed?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:42:42 Yeah, yeah.

John Dehlin 1:42:43 All right, well, let's go to the next slide, shall we?

Guest 3 1:42:46 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:42:46 And so just kind of, we've been highlighting this a bit, but you know, this particular story is not quite as obvious as the first three that we gave about Nelson. Just because of the fact that, you know, it's a slightly different scenario where Nelson's not necessarily kind of the star of the show. But you could see that Tom Kristofferson is clearly rebuking Nelson's statement that it was a revelation from God given directly to Thomas Monson as they sat in prayer. Because it's now a bit of an open secret that Monson was incapable of making those kinds of statements. And Todd Christofferson's description of the proceedings completely contradict Nelson's story that the apostles, as RFM said, discussed ever permutation and discussion in the temple regularly as Christofferson is clear that these handbook changes were presented with a straight up and down vote, no debate. And on the flip side, as I said, this makes sense when you realize that Nelson, one, would have supported that policy and two, knew he was a prophet in waiting. And by building up the idea of this revelation, it would immediately elevate his own standing once Monson passed away and Nelson takes over. And so, you know, and if that's not enough, as RFM also pointed out, no one else involved in this change ever gave a description like Nelson did, which seems odd given the fact that Nelson says they were all there. They all got to witness this. It was all this miraculous, amazing revelation, and yet not a single other apostle would step up and give any description like Nelson did, which tends to look like Nelson is out on his own on this one.

John Dehlin 1:44:07 And for me, there's two important points that we haven't really mentioned. One was that as soon as this policy came out, progressive and liberal Mormons just couldn't believe it. They were just like, there's no way that the church has made so much progress in the past 10 or 20 years. There's no way this happened. And so there was all this murmuring, and the way that the progressive and liberal Mormons were justifying it was by saying that it's just a policy and it'll change. It's not doctrine. So one of the motivations for Nelson doubling down was to try and squelch the progressive rumors that this wasn't doctrine, it was just a policy. But the other really important motivation, I think, was that the other word that was getting around was that there was not unanimity in the quorum, that there were actually apostles that were not advised that this policy was coming down and who disagreed with this decision. And, you know, this is sort of. This is sort of a tactic that apostles have made in the past where if one of them can just get to the media and make a public statement because they have a policy of never disagreeing with each other in public, the Rest have to go with whatever the vocal apostle leads with. And in this case, I believe this was Nelson forcing all the apostles to get in line and to communicate through back channels that they were supportive of. Of this decision. Because. Because once it's declared publicly as doctrine, there can be no back channel conversations that were happening, as I understand it, where apostles, like possibly Christofferson, like possibly Holland, like definitely Uchtdorf, would have been saying, what the f. What the fetch Russell and Nelson and Downey jokes. Why are you jamming this through without our approval? We do not approve of this heinous revelation.

Nemo 1:46:13 Right. And John, whatever happened to this story that I've heard about important decisions being made by talking things out? Remember, we talk things out around the table and we keep talking until everybody comes to a consensus. And that consensus then becomes the definition of revelation.

John Dehlin 1:46:30 Yeah.

Nemo 1:46:31 What's all this about it? No, no discussion. It sprung on them on Tuesday, November 3, 2015, for an up or down vote. What kind of horse is that?

John Dehlin 1:46:44 It seems pretty clear that. That Nelson and Oaks decided they wanted to jam this into the church's policies and they didn't want to get buy off by the other members of the quorum of the 12. And so they ramroded it through and then faced the wrath, you know, in response. Not just the wrath of the apostles privately, but of the public.

Nemo 1:47:10 Very much so. And by the way, John, remember, even before they got to the part where people are lining up and crowds are going to resign from the church on Temple Square by hundreds and thousands, I mean, it was massive. I know it's a few years ago, but we don't want to forget it. But even so, after this was leaked by you, John, on November 5, the first response that I heard from faithful members was, this was an anti Mormon lie because the leaders would never do this. Do you remember that?

John Dehlin 1:47:40 Absolutely. Yeah. It's like John Dehlin created, you know, something to smear the good name of

Nemo 1:47:47 the church, you know, and then the following evening on November 6th, Friday, they scrambled and got D. Todd.

Guest 3 1:47:55 Yeah. Christopherson and Mike Otterson got thrown in a room.

Nemo 1:47:59 Yes.

Guest 3 1:48:00 Which Christopherson had just come back from a trip. No, like he was thrown into that quite heavily. Yeah.

Nemo 1:48:06 Obviously they had to scramble and they had to scramble fast. And they did. But the thing that was the most important part of it was. Yeah, this isn't something that's being made up by John Dehlin. John de Lin's name wasn't brought up, of course, but it confirmed that. Yeah, this is really something that the church Just did. Yes. This just happened.

John Dehlin 1:48:24 Yeah. Well, so are. Do we clear the slide, Mike? Do we get everything from it?

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:48:30 Yeah.

John Dehlin 1:48:31 Okay. So I. I think so. Okay, let's. Let's. There's two slides left. Let's go to the next slide.

Wrapping Up Nelson's Pattern of Miracle Claims

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:48:35 Yeah, just, you know, just to kind of start to wrap this up, we have Nelson now fabricating, exaggerating, whatever words you want to use. Four different miracle stories.

John Dehlin 1:48:44 Oh, yeah, I got to give my count. I'm definitely given this. I'm. This. My BS meter is all off on this one. So this is LDS discussions RFM and Nemo for Russell M. Nelson. Zero. He. He got swept. He got swept today. Okay.

Nemo 1:48:57 And those three stories, Mike, those first three stories, I think they're kind of incontrovertible, and when you start adding them up, you see a pattern happening. The real problem is that that's just fun and games, but when you get to this fourth example, suddenly it becomes serious.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:49:11 Yep.

John Dehlin 1:49:12 Yeah. It really is a matter. LGBT issues in Mormonism are a matter of life and death. Just objectively, with the suicide epidemic that we've had and the way that families get destroyed in the depression and the anxiety. All right, so go ahead, Mike.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:49:26 Yeah, just, you know, one of the things that I want, you know, we pointed out as we went, is the first three make Nelson the star of the story, really to, I believe, establish his place in the church among God's chosen people. I mean, this really elevates himself above other people because he's getting the miracles that everybody else is hoping for. And the fourth story is very beneficial to himself because he knows Monson was not in good health and he would soon be being taking over his prophet. And, you know, more troubling is that Russell M. Nelson seems to have no problem inventing miraculous elements of these stories in order to establish himself as that elect member of the church. And we've covered this. This is something that happened with Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, you know, the fact that Nelson had to invent the idea of the woman with a hat on her head in order to claim he received a prompting from God, to me, is one of the most troubling aspects of these stories, because it's showing that he's willing to lie about a revelation, vision, prompting from God in order to tell a story that boosts his own image, because, remember, that woman didn't wear a hat. He needed to invent the idea of the hat in order to make that story make sense, that he'd pick her out of a crowd. It's a whole Bunch of little details that maybe seem small by themselves, but when you realize what he's trying to do, he's trying to create these little details to make the story work. That, to me, is problematic, especially when you're using it to claim promptings from God. And every member who receives a spiritual confirmation when hearing these stories was emotionally manipulated because they didn't happen as they were told. And to me, as we've talked about in these previous episodes, it shows how unreliable spiritual witnesses are when it comes to discerning truth. And you have to then ask yourself, if I had that spiritual confirmation on a story that wasn't true, what does that tell you about having a spiritual confirmation? And, you know, the bottom line is, if Nelson is willing to make up these stories to create miracles, you can be sure that he has. And he will just as easily fabricate stories about receiving other claimed revelations and impressions from God, just as we saw with the November 15 policy. And, you know, again, we've used this line a few times. But Wendy Nelson, his current wife, really gives the game away when she admits of what being a prophet really boils down to for Russell Nelson. And she said, I have seen him changing the last 10 months. It's as though he's been unleashed. He's free to follow thing, follow through with things he's been concerned about but never could never do. Now that he's president, he can do those things. And you combine that mindset with the pattern of Russell Nelson making up, exaggerating, fabricating stories in order to get what he needs to get done, and that's kind of a dangerous recipe and certainly not one that speaks to an honest and an open church.

Nemo 1:52:02 Yeah. As I put it four years ago, the question is not whether we should sustain President Nelson as a prophet, seer, and revelator. The question is whether we would buy a used car from this man.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:52:15 Yeah, it's true. Yeah, I wouldn't either. Once you realize it's the same. You know, I've used this reference a lot or this example, but, you know, if you. If you catch your spouse lying three times and then you catch him lying a fourth time, are you going to continue to be like, yeah, I think he's. I think he's on the up and up. Or you can be like, okay, I think that's enough. And that, to me, is what it boils down to how many times you need the leader of your church to fabricate stories that are miraculous. Before you go, I don't think this guy is really coming at this with the most upright and respectable demeanor. And I guess everyone has a different answer, apparently. But to me, I think four times is more than enough.

Guest 3 1:52:52 And seven of the 15. I'm just going to get this out there from my own research. Seven of the 15 have been involved in, have been involved collectively and 11 instances of public dishonesty that I've put together. And there is, there is more if you count some of these things as well. So, yeah, you know, the, it's, it's epidemic within the senior leadership of the church. This isn't just Russell M. Nelson. 7 out of 15, essentially half you just need, we just need to find one more of them doing something like this. And we're over half of the members of the first pregnancy of corner the 12 have been. And I think she's honest.

John Dehlin 1:53:29 Yeah. And I think, I think why this is particularly meaningful within the context of this LDS discussion series is, you know, I was thinking about how horrific it is that the Mormon Church has such a record of protecting abusers, child abusers and, and sexual abusers and at the expense of victims. But then I was thinking, well, obviously if, if the founder of your religion engaged in predatory sexual behavior and justified it, then of course there's going to be sexual problems down the road with the way that the leadership handles sexual matters. And it's the same kind of thing here on LDS discussions. We've chronicled how Joseph Smith made things up, made up stories, made up, stretch stories, added to them over time, change things if necessary, got done away with revelations if they weren't convenient, rewrote revelations out of whole cloth to completely flip their meaning. If your religion starts with a prevaricating prophet, then how in the world can you expect subsequent prophets to, to hold a different standard of truth and of honesty? I mean, the apple doesn't far that fall from the tree. The fish rots from the head.

Guest 3 1:54:50 And you know, because the, the vast nepotism, there's some, there's some genetic reasoning behind all this too.

Guest 4 1:54:57 Yeah.

Guest 3 1:54:58 You know, Henry B. Eyring, I think is the fourth in a line of nephews coming from Hiram, coming from Joseph Smith himself. Emerald Ballard is the great nephew of, of Hiram Smith, all this other stuff. So, yeah, it's all contained within this little group.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:55:15 Yeah.

John Dehlin 1:55:17 Well, Mike, let's let you give this final slide.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:55:20 Yeah, just, you know, as I said earlier, fool me one, shame on you. Fool me four times, shame on us. And it just, we've, we've covered so many of these episodes that we've done in this series about Joseph Smith fabricating miracle stories. When his credibility was questioned, when his leadership was being questioned, we could document how Brigham Young did it. We talk about the transfiguration of Brigham Young being created basically seven years after it happened as a mundane event. And the question I keep asking applies here. If any other religious leader was caught fabricating or outright inventing four different miracle stories in order to set themselves apart as a chosen prophet of God, what would you say about that person's credibility and character? And there's no amount of special pleading that can change what the conclusion is about Russell Nelson if he was from any other church. And I think it sucks as a member to hear this episode, it sucks as a member to read these things. But at the end of the day, these are stories that are documented contemporaneously. And once you have that and you can compare to how they're told years later, you can't really deny the fact that Russell Nelson is making up miracles while doing it. As someone who is trying to build his own charisma up among the membership to be revered as one of the all time prophets of the church. I think, you know, we joke about how he creates more temples to try to, you know, one up Gordon B. Hinckley, because Gordon B. Hinckley clearly had a grudge against, with the whole name change, it just seems that Nelson has a big need for having a big legacy. And unfortunately, it's one thing to exaggerate a story, it's another thing to do it in the name of God. And I, I think that's where you have to say, well, if he's willing to do it, if Joseph Smith was willing to do it, kind of what you guys were just saying it, what's left? At some point you just got to go, none of this adds up. And if nothing adds up, then there's no value to a church where every single truth claim is problematic.

Nemo 1:57:03 Yeah, there's so many elements and so many ways you can look at this, but one of the ones I just want to touch on is that when you have a leader of the church, it happened with Paul H. Dunn, it's happening again with President Nelson, who are willing to embellish stories to make pedestrian things or ordinary everyday things miraculous, which it sure looks like we've got the receipts on President Nelson in this regard. When you do that and you get caught, it's a really bad thing. When you're a leader in a church that's whole claim to authenticity is based upon the miraculous stories of its founder. Because as soon as you start taking ordinary things and fabricating them to become miraculous, you immediately raise the question of whether Joseph Smith did the same thing.

Guest 4 1:57:52 Yeah.

Nemo 1:57:53 And you shouldn't go there as a leader of the church. You don't want the members to ask that question and see you as a representative of exactly what it is that if Joseph Smith did that this whole church's truth claims go out the window.

Guest 3 1:58:07 Yeah, it's just too close to home.

Nemo 1:58:09 Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 1:58:10 Yeah, it is.

John Dehlin 1:58:13 And I'll just say, as important as I think this episode is, and as, as, you know, bad as that I think it is to lie, especially if you're someone who claims to speak to and for God and Jesus, for me, these, these prevarications of Nelson pale in comparison to some of the most heinous things that he's presided over, which is again, the protection, the protection of abusers at the expense of victims systemically, whether it's Boy Scouts or little girls or boys or teenagers or youth in the church. You know, the whole Kurt mcconi sexual abuse cover up scandals that have been plaguing Mormonism. He has been presiding over that. Not to mention, you know, fighting same sex marriage, fighting same sex love, the LGBTQ suicide epidemic that he has partially provide. Presided over. Not to mention, you know, the demote, the demotion of women such that they're second class citizens within the church and don't have authority or power to exercise the priesthood or to hold basic offices in the Church. And I guess what's really timely is he's presided over the deception, you know, kind of fraudulent activity in terms of how the Church has hid its. Knowingly hid its financial assets from the membership and from the world and literally created fraudulent shell companies and recruited members of the Church to sign their names to documents as accomplices in a fraud that the securities Exchange Commission has condemned and fined the Church for and that the IRS is currently investigating. Like, can't we all agree that these lies are really small potatoes for the real harm that's been done by this man and by his, his cohort?

Guest 3 2:00:02 Yeah, but I think they show how the other things can happen. They show how he doesn't view. He views the law and what ought to be done as a barrier to faith promotion and his overall mission to the church. You know, it's. It's interesting, the relationship the Church has with the law. I've said this before about when it comes to the Arizona case, they said, oh, well, we agree with the Supreme Court's decision. We shouldn't have to report things so they'll chummy up to the law when it helps them, but then when it comes to financial reporting, they go, oh, the law is a barrier. How do we get around it? And so they create 13 shell companies to get around it. So they'll lean into the law when it suits them, what's right when it suits them, but they have no qualms about disregarding it and trying to get around it when it serves their purpose.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:00:49 Yeah. And I think, you know the line that Nelson said in 2019, we may not always tell people what they want to hear, Profits are rarely popular, but we will always teach the truth. And it's just funny when you hear that, knowing that he's told a bunch of stories that are just factually not true. And to your earlier point, you know, for me, these are important because they give a window into what how Nelson is, as Nemo just said, how Nelson operates. But, yeah, I don't think that these are as important as the earlier foundational issues, because if Joseph Smith made up the First Vision and the priesthood restoration, which, as we detailed, I believe he did, if Joseph Smith authored the Book of Mormon, which every basically every field of study tells you he did, then, yeah, Nelson is a powerless man who is only there because people still believe that. That the Church is true. And so I don't believe that the Church is true. And so to me, Nelson, I don't know how I'm not phrasing this the best way, but I think the earlier stuff's more important because if the church is not true, there's no reason to worry to. To believe and listen to what Nelson is doing today. I don't know if I'm making sense, but it does matter because there are millions of people who are listening to these talks today and feeling that spirit and not understanding that what Nelson is doing is not consistent with the Church's own definition of honesty.

Closing Thoughts and Acknowledgments

John Dehlin 2:02:05 All right, well, I think we made our case today. Mike, thank you so much for your work here on LDS discussions. You do great work and you're influencing a lot of people.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:02:15 Well, I would say thanks to rfm, because this entire episode was basically done through his podcast on the Three Miracles and then him with Bill Real on the Flight of Death. So really, everything that I put together was just basically repurposing what they had already done. So huge thanks to RFM and to BillReal on their. Their episode. But RFM's podcast from four years ago, if you have not listened to it, episode 84, it goes into more detail. On Mozambique, the lady in the hat and the November 15 policy. I think it's a must listen to to get even more details than we talked about today.

John Dehlin 2:02:46 Rfm. How can people support you best financially so that you can do this full time?

Nemo 2:02:52 Well, I am doing it full time now.

John Dehlin 2:02:55 Right. I know.

Nemo 2:02:56 The thing is that when you're in a law practice and you're transferring out, there's no such thing as a clear line of demarcation because I stopped taking new clients a year ago, but I'm still representing clients because, you know, the wheels of justice grind slow and all that. You can go to radiofreemormon.org, donate there. It would be wonderful and very much appreciated. I talk about Radio Free Mormon and your donations. Keeping Radio Free Mormon broadcasting behind enemy lines. Well, that's not just a slogan anymore. That's actually the truth because it's not a hobby. It's not something on the side. It's not something. In addition to my day job, this is my sole source of income now. So it's paying the bills, it's putting food on the table, it's buying Marvel T shirts, it's doing everything. So I really appreciate all the people who, who do support me. Encourage anyone who does listen to go there to radiofreemormon.org now, click, make a $5 a month donation.

John Dehlin 2:03:53 And no, no, I'd say 10. 10 or 20. 10 or 20. Not five.

Nemo 2:03:59 I'll take whatever it is. I'll take anything at this point. Honestly, folks, it'd be great. Just wonderful. And I just did want to add that President Nelson, he's amazing. The heart surgeon who became the prophet.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:04:10 Right.

Nemo 2:04:11 He's not only better than President Hinckley, he's better than every prophet before. He's actually jockeying for position to be better than Joseph Smith. And at this point in his career, I will tell you that President Nelson is the mightiest prophet who's ever lived. So much so that not only does he receive revelation from God, God receives revelation from him. True story.

Guest 4 2:04:41 Oh, dear.

John Dehlin 2:04:42 Thanks, rfm. Nemo, how can people support your good work?

Guest 3 2:04:48 They can. They can come and hit the donate button on my channel if they like. They can just come and watch my show and come say hi and just have a good time. That's how they can support me.

John Dehlin 2:05:00 All right. Well, Nemo, we're really, we're really grateful that you join us on this LDS discussion series. People love your contributions.

Nemo 2:05:08 That was very nice the way you put that, Nemo. So you don't want them to contribute to you. Then everybody take the contributions. You wouldn't. Nemo.

Guest 3 2:05:16 It's. It is my full time job. But, you know, it's fine.

John Dehlin 2:05:21 I love it. All right, well, steal the bread from

Guest 3 2:05:24 my mouth and give it to rfm.

John Dehlin 2:05:26 No. There's a. The pie. A rising tide lifts all ships. The pie is expanding and we're all going to be. Mike, you're going to be doing this full time soon.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:05:35 I do not think so. There's no way I'm doing this full time. I would get burned out way too fast. But I do like, you know, I would say in all. On all truthfulness, when I started going down the rabbit hole, RFM's podcast was one of the ones I gravitated to because he would do these episodes where he put these. These topics into a perspective that resonated in a way beyond just being upset. You know, his episodes aren't super over the top, angry or making fun of things. And so I always appreciated the way he approached things. And so if you've never listened to some of his older episodes, you know, I know the Wrong Roads episode is a very famous one, but just go through his back catalog if there's so much good stuff that even though it might be done four years ago, it's still very relevant and very important to studying all this stuff. So in all honesty, I'm very thankful that he was doing what he was doing. I know he's only been on a couple of our episodes, but a lot of what he has done has been repurposed by me along with the work of others. So, you know, it is very cool that he's on today because this really is his work and everyone should go out there and do what they can

Guest 3 2:06:40 to support and his glory.

John Dehlin 2:06:42 Yeah, basically, as, as. As Russell Nelson is to believing Mormons. RFM is to post Mormons. I mean, basically.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:06:50 Yeah, like I said, he. Some of these, you know, we're kind of. I don't know when this is going to actually release, but he did an episode on Kyle McKay's compelling reason to Doubt and you listen to it. And the way he just pulls some of the ideas from what McKay's talk is and explains them in a way that I wouldn't have picked up my own. It's. It's very cool. And I also recommend if you have

John Dehlin 2:07:11 not listened to the man.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:07:13 Yeah, I'm giving a lot here. The, The Mormon.

John Dehlin 2:07:19 I don't get in the background.

Guest 3 2:07:20 Yeah, I don't get this kind of love from Mike, by the way.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:07:28 So, anyways, their episode on the Greek salter incident on Mormonism Live, you need to listen to that one. Was one that turned me from someone who dismissed it outright to actually thinking there's more to it. So that's all I'll say, because now it's getting weird.

Guest 3 2:07:46 That's gonna have sounded so bad, John, because, like, we're probably slightly out of sync, but I think I'm in time with you.

John Dehlin 2:07:54 So, yeah, hail to the rfm. Hail to the rfm.

Nemo 2:07:58 That's because Nemo's playing the part of President Oaks in the Hosanna Shout Indeed competition.

Guest 3 2:08:04 Yeah. Yeah.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:08:05 Anyways, but thank you, rfm, for being here. And thanks for. For letting me steal all your work.

John Dehlin 2:08:12 Thanks, guys.

Nemo 2:08:13 Mike, you're very gracious. I appreciate you. I'm honored. I'm flattered. Thank you, really, sincerely.

Mike (LDS Discussions) 2:08:19 Thanks, everyone, for being here.

John Dehlin 2:08:20 Thanks, guys. And thanks for joining us today on Mormon Stories podcast. We appreciate all you do. You can also support Mormon Stories Podcast by going to MormonStories.org clicking on the Donate button, becoming a monthly donor. And we really appreciate Mike and this LDS discussion series. Please share it with anyone who you think could benefit from it. We. We apologize that Today didn't quite match the. The tenor and the tone of what we have been trying to do so far. But, you know, we're towards the end, and you get an rfm, you just gotta roll with it because he's so brilliant. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for your support. And we'll see you all again soon on another episode of Mormon Stories podcast and at least a few more episodes of LDS discussions before the summer break. Take care, everybody.

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.