Today we'll look at a different podcast in the "grievance grifter" genre: Mormon Discussion Inc. This podcast is hosted by Bill Reel and Corbin Volluz (aka RFM or Radio Free Mormon), both of whom are usually rational and inquisitive. They've done some useful work, although their obvious editorial bias is to promote anything and anyone whom they think will undermine the faith of Latter-day Saints, all to make money (although presumably not yet as much as Mormon Stories).
Like much of the Internet, these podcasts profit by confirming the biases of their viewers, who are eager to find others who share their grievances. It's a great business model because there are people with grievances in every organization (work, religion, politics, science, NGOs, etc.), so there is no end of content and audiences to consume it.
These podcasts serve viewers by confirming their biases under the guise of "high standards." This particular one declares this standard: "We’re a team of creators, researchers, and truth-seekers committed to exploring Mormonism with honesty, depth, and curiosity. Our work digs into the real history, theology, and lived experience of the LDS Church, tracing the documented record and unpacking the stories behind the faith. Transparency, accuracy, and integrity are the values we stand on."
They apparently forgot these standards for this interview with Randy Bell, however.
Let's start with the clickbait title:
New Research Changes EVERYTHING!!!
As usual, the clickbait is fake because this episode changes nothing (apart from lowering the intellectual standards of Mormon Discussion Inc.).
The description:
Dr. Randall Bell brings fresh new research to Mormon Studies in this fascinating episode of Radio Free Mormon! Apologists claim the presence of an ancient Hebrew literary form called "chiasmus" proves the Book of Mormon to be ancient. "Not so fast," says Dr. Bell, who shares with us a much more plausible source for chiasmus in the Book of Mormon than being put there by ancient American Jews whom DNA studies show didn't exist. This is an episode you will want to not only watch, but share with your friends and family! The more we study the Book of Mormon, the more apparent it is a product of early 19th Century America! [RFM 445]
Randy is a great guy. I assume he's normally rational and fact-based, but to promote his Dartmouth conspiracy theory, he set those qualities aside, as we'll see. And Corbin let Randy go on and on without challenging anything he said.
Needless to say, they didn't invite me on the show, either to explain my point of view (which Randy misrepresented) or to rebut Randy's claims.
Nor did they mention, display, or cite my paper on the topic. In fact, instead of taking a screen shot of my paper to let readers know I did, actually, post a (free) detailed paper on this topic, Randy retyped it on a separate slide to take it out of context.
So much for "Transparency, accuracy, and integrity are the values we stand on."
I'm actually surprised that Corbin let him get away with all of this, but I infer that Randy was confirming Corbin's bias, so he ate it up. No doubt his audience did likewise.
Anyone can read my paper here:
Ironically, as I've explained ad nauseum to Randy, I (i) readily acknowledge that Hyrum attended the boy's school at the Dartmouth campus as shown on the attendance records for fall 1814 and (ii) am happy to accept any actual evidence of Hyrum's additional attendance if any such exists.
Randy and I had a discussion about this topic several months ago. We did a podcast together on the topic. I explained then, as I have ever since, that I don't have a horse in this race.
In fact, I asked Randy for any such additional evidence so I could include it in my paper. He claimed he had such evidence but wouldn't share it with me.
And in this interview, we learn that Randy actually has no such evidence, after all.
All he has is his imagination, as anyone can see watching this podcast.
[Note: Randy is so obsessed with his conspiracy theory that when I did another interview and mentioned Dartmouth in passing, in one or two sentences, Randy called the podcaster and demanded that my entire interview be withdrawn from YouTube. It's all so ridiculous.]
Here's the link to the interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIAgsNvWDkU
Background. Randy's Dartmouth conspiracy theory tries to explain "Mormonism" as a product of Hyrum Smith's education at Dartmouth. In this episode, he claims Hyrum learned about chiasmus at Dartmouth and then taught it to Joseph Smith, who incorporated it into the Book of Mormon.
This Dartmouth conspiracy theory is a modern equivalent of the old Spalding theory which attempted to explain the Book of Mormon as a composition of Solomon Spalding that someone (presumably Sidney Rigdon) stole and adapted to produce a manuscript that Joseph read to his scribes. Randy is vague about who, exactly, produced the manuscript that Joseph read, but he claims Joseph learned from his brother Hyrum all kinds of sophisticated theology, including, in this case, the Hebrew structure of chiasmus.
Assumptions. Randy's Dartmouth conspiracy theory depends on three assumptions:
1. Hyrum Smith attended the school more regularly than the documentation shows.
2. Although the sole documentary evidence shows Hyrum studied "arithmetic" in the fall of 1814 while his fellow students studied classics, Hyrum actually studied theology and Hebrew poetic structures.
3. As a young teenager, Hyrum successfully understood the college-level lectures on theology and was able to teach his younger brother Joseph (not yet a teen) so well that Joseph was able to incorporate all of this when he composed the Book of Mormon.
Evidentiary support and rationales.
To support assumption 1, Randy cites the Behrens article and other sources that in turn relied not on documentary evidence but on mere assumptions and inferences based on Lucy Mack Smith's vague recollection in one sentence she dictated 30 years after the fact. And yet Randy rejects almost everything else Lucy related, including her more detailed and specific recollections (such as handling the Urim and Thummim, Joseph's experiences translating, etc.)
To support assumptions 2 and 3, Randy imagines that young Hyrum mastered these concepts without writing them down or ever referring to them and that his family was unaware of Hyrum's sophisticated understanding (or else covered it up).
Randy imagines that Joseph incorporated the Hebrew style of chiasmus in 1829 so successfully that in over a century of critical analysis by leading Biblical experts, no one discovered it until Jack Welch in the 1960s.
Conclusion.
I an happy to consider any actual evidence. My FAITH model of analysis starts with Facts, and separates those from Assumptions, Inferences and Theories.
In this case, the only documentary evidence that exists, as Randy acknowledges, shows Hyrum attended the charity school in Fall 1814.
Whether he attended more is unknown, but even if he did, anyone can assess the feasibility of Hyrum understanding, memorizing, and conveying the sophisticated theology and Hebrew writing styles Randy attributes to him.
_____
Grok Podcast Summary: "New Research Changes EVERYTHING!!!" (Radio Free Mormon Episode 445)
This is a recent episode (uploaded March 15, 2026) from the Radio Free Mormon podcast, hosted by Corbin Volluz (RFM) on the Mormon Discussion Inc. channel. The guest is Dr. Randall Bell (often called Randy), who presents original research challenging a key Book of Mormon apologetic argument.
Core Topic
Apologists frequently cite chiasmus (also spelled "chiasm" or referred to as "kayasmus" in the episode) — an ancient Hebrew literary structure of inverted parallelism (e.g., A-B-C-C-B-A patterns) — as strong evidence that the Book of Mormon is an authentic ancient text translated by Joseph Smith. Dr. Bell argues this is not the case and offers a far more plausible 19th-century American source.
Main Arguments and Key Points
- Hyrum Smith's Dartmouth Connection: Hyrum Smith (Joseph's older brother) attended Moore's Academy (part of Dartmouth College) from roughly 1811–1816. The curriculum emphasized rhetoric, classical languages (Greek/Latin), theology, outlining techniques ("laying down heads" for sermons), and literary structures. Joseph Smith was tutored by Hyrum during his 1813 leg surgery recovery (performed by Dartmouth's Dr. Nathan Smith), giving indirect but significant exposure to these ideas.
- Chiasmus Was Not Unknown in 19th-Century America: Contrary to claims by apologists like John Welch (who in 1969 said no one in 1829 western New York would have known about it), the episode shows chiasmus-like structures appeared in contemporary sermons (e.g., by Pastor Roswell Shortliff), the King James Bible (which Joseph knew well), and everyday rhetorical training. Examples from the Bible, Jesus' teachings, JFK quotes, and Book of Mormon passages (like Alma 36 or Mosiah 5:10-12) are compared.
- Refuting Apologists: The discussion directly counters figures like Jonathan Neville and Brad Whitmer, who downplay or misrepresent Hyrum's time at Dartmouth (claiming it was only one quarter in 1814). Multiple LDS sources (Lucy Mack Smith's history, Encyclopedia of Mormonism, BYU studies, and even the church website) confirm the longer attendance. Richard Baron's dissertation is cited as supporting evidence.
- How the Book of Mormon Was Produced: Chiasmus and outlining made dictation more efficient — allowing Joseph to "double" content through reversal patterns while using the "rock in a hat" method (likely reading from prepared outlines or notes). The episode frames the Book of Mormon as a clear product of early 19th-century American intellectual and religious culture, not ancient Hebrew/Nephite origins. It also ties in broader issues like DNA evidence and lack of archaeological support.
- Closing Thoughts: Dr. Bell uses a "magic trick" analogy: there are multiple natural ways to achieve the apparent "miracle" of the Book of Mormon's complexity without invoking the supernatural. Collaboration (including with some faithful researchers) helped uncover this.
Tone and Style
Typical RFM: engaging, detailed, and sharply critical of apologetic arguments while remaining conversational and evidence-focused. RFM introduces and moderates; Dr. Bell dives deep into the research. The episode is presented as "changing everything" for those who see chiasmus as proof of antiquity.
_____
Grok summary of my Academia paper:
The review on Academia.edu (a detailed critique of Richard K. Behrens' 2006 John Whitmer Historical Association Journal article) highlights important limitations in the sources. It emphasizes that the only clear primary documentary evidence is the 1814 school record, and it critiques both Behrens' broader timeline (1811–1816) and Lucy Mack Smith's account as insufficiently precise to support multi-year or continuous attendance. This aligns with several other scholarly examinations of the records.
Primary Documentary Evidence
- The sole surviving contemporary school record is from Joseph Perry's student lists for Moor's Indian Charity School:
- Hyrum ("Hiram Smith") does not appear in the 1813–1814 academic year records.
- He does appear for the first quarter only (roughly August–November 1814) of the 1814–1815 year, listed as one of the "charity scholars" studying arithmetic.
- He is absent from later records, including the end-of-year examinations in 1816.
- Records for Moor's School are known to be incomplete overall, but the surviving ones are specific enough to show (i) absence in 1813-1814 school year, (ii) presence in fall 1814 and (iii) absence afterward. The "charity scholar" designation implies he had shown academic promise (possibly from prior exposure), and his tuition/board was covered by school funds.
This matches the review's point: 1814 is the only year with direct documentary confirmation, limited to one quarter, and no evidence supports regular attendance after that.
Lucy Mack Smith's Account (1845)
Lucy states (in her dictated family history):
"Our second son, Hyrum, we established in the academy in Hanover."
- This is placed in the context of the family living in Lebanon, New Hampshire (around 1811 onward).
- The review (and other analyses) describes it as vague: Lucy does not specify the year(s), duration, frequency, or exact nature of attendance. It simply indicates that Hyrum was sent there at some point during the Lebanon years.
- Lucy's history was written decades later (dictated in 1844–1845) and contains some chronological imprecisions common to reminiscences. However, it is a firsthand family account and is widely accepted as indicating that Hyrum did attend for some period.
Many sources combine Lucy's statement with the 1814 record to infer possible earlier or sporadic attendance (e.g., starting ~1811 when the family moved to Lebanon and a cousin was already enrolled), but the review correctly notes the vagueness prevents firm conclusions about length or continuity.
Behrens' 2006 Article vs. the Review
- Behrens claims Hyrum "entered the Dartmouth community in 1811 and left in 1816," tying this to exposure to Arminian theology, rhetoric, and curriculum that could have influenced the Smith family and early Mormonism. He suggests possible intermittent returns (e.g., in 1814 after Joseph's leg surgery recovery).
- The Academia.edu review treats Behrens' work as "seminal" for exploring Dartmouth-Smith connections but critiques it for overreaching on the duration and depth of Hyrum's attendance. It points out the lack of records before or after 1814 and the vagueness of Lucy's statement as insufficient to sustain a 5–6 year claim.
Overall Consensus on Duration and Implications
- Documented attendance: Confirmed for one quarter in fall 1814 (arithmetic as a charity scholar). No records after that.
- Possible earlier/sporadic attendance: Suggested by Lucy's account and the charity scholar status (implying prior performance), but unproven by surviving documents. Total exposure likely amounted to less than one to two years overall, possibly intermittent.
- Curriculum context: Even limited attendance at Moor's (a preparatory academy feeding into Dartmouth) would have involved basic-to-intermediate studies, including arithmetic, rhetoric/outlining techniques ("laying down heads" for sermons), and exposure to classical and theological ideas common in early 19th-century academies. Hyrum could have shared elements of this with Joseph during recovery periods.
- Apologists sometimes minimize this to "one quarter in 1814" to downplay influence on Joseph or the Book of Mormon. Critics (including in the RFM episode with Dr. Randall Bell) argue that even limited exposure, combined with the King James Bible and contemporary American rhetorical practices, provides a naturalistic explanation for structures like chiasmus—without needing ancient origins.
The Academia.edu review strengthens a cautious approach: the evidence is real but narrow. It does not support expansive claims of years-long, advanced Dartmouth-level training, but it also does not eliminate meaningful exposure in 1811–1814 (especially 1814).
This nuance is important for the chiasmus discussion in the podcast: even a single well-documented quarter plus family tutoring/sharing could transmit practical rhetorical tools that Joseph later applied during dictation.
