{"id":8717,"date":"2026-08-23T20:19:03","date_gmt":"2026-08-24T03:19:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/?p=8717"},"modified":"2026-08-23T20:48:23","modified_gmt":"2026-08-24T03:48:23","slug":"lying-about-prophets-radio-free-mormons-case-against-jacob-hansens-defense-of-fallible-prophets","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/2026\/08\/23\/lying-about-prophets-radio-free-mormons-case-against-jacob-hansens-defense-of-fallible-prophets\/","title":{"rendered":"Lying About Prophets: Radio Free Mormon\u2019s Case Against Jacob Hansen\u2019s Defense of Fallible Prophets"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><em><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>Photo:<\/strong><\/span> This image shows Jacob Hansen channeling his inner Justin Martyr, minus that whole beheading by the Roman prefect Rusticus. Hansen is a Latter-day Saint businessman, father of four, seminary teacher, youth-football coach, surfer, hunter, sailor, Jiu-Jitsu enthusiast, and operator of Thoughtful Faith\u2014a channel apparently founded on the premise that a sufficiently busy man can refute atheism, Islam, and historical criticism somewhere between carpool pickup and a rear-naked choke.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>Raised outside Sparks, Nevada, in a blue-collar LDS family of eight, Hansen served a mission in Argentina before confronting the horrifying realization that relatives can leave the Church without immediately being struck by doctrinal lightning. When all seven siblings and much of his extended family departed, he embarked on a decade-long intellectual journey\u2014one that seems to have ended precisely where it began, except now furnished with YouTube lighting, clipped quotations from General Authorities, and a sturdy aversion to conclusions that fail ecclesiastical inspection.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>His apologetic method is admirably efficient: identify a difficult question, cite a prophet, declare the matter eternally settled, and treat unresolved evidence as a spiritual character defect. If ice-cream sales and shark attacks both rise in July, Hansen\u2019s worldview assures us there is no need to investigate temperature, tourism, or ocean access\u2014just ask whether the correlation supports the approved conclusion.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>In the end, the only apologetic claim Jacob Hansen can make is self-imposed: his defense of Mormonism is less an argument than a vow never to permit the evidence a meaningful rebuttal.<\/em><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #2e5a88;\"><i>Claude AI summary of Radio Free Mormon \u2022 Episode 475<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #5a5a5a;\">Recorded August 21, 2026 \u00b7 Premiered August 22, 2026 \u00b7 Approx. 1 hr 11 min<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>Overview<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Episode 475 is a sustained critique of Latter-day Saint apologist Jacob Hansen and of what the host regards as an untenable position: that LDS prophets can be, and demonstrably have been, wrong about consequential doctrinal matters, and yet remain trustworthy guides whom members must follow. The host frames this not as bad reasoning but as deception \u2014 hence the title. The program proceeds through slides, video clips, scriptural tests, and historical case studies, closing with a satirical sketch offered as the most economical refutation of Hansen\u2019s position.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #8b2635;\">\u25c6 \u25c6 \u25c6<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"YouTube video player\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/h7XEMRNLYGI?si=2gav3hVYDoawjBw4\" width=\"560\" height=\"315\" frameborder=\"0\" allowfullscreen=\"allowfullscreen\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>The Charge Stated<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The host opens by defining precisely what he means by the accusation of lying. He grants that it would be no lie for an apologist who sincerely believed prophets do not err doctrinally to urge members to follow them. The charge attaches specifically because Hansen has publicly conceded, on multiple occasions, that LDS prophets have erred \u2014 and not on trivia, but on matters of first-order doctrinal importance. The example the host returns to throughout is the priesthood and temple ban on black members, which stood for 126 years until 1978.<\/p>\n<p>Having conceded the unreliability, the host argues, Hansen nevertheless urges reliance. That combination, not the concession itself, constitutes the alleged deception.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i>We do not need to trust those who are not trustworthy.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #6f7073;\">\u2014 <b>Radio Free Mormon, Episode 475<\/b><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>He distinguishes his own position from Hansen\u2019s: he too criticizes the LDS leadership, but he is not a believing member, does not regard these men as prophets, and is not encouraging anyone to follow them \u2014 which Hansen does while acknowledging the grounds that make it unwise.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>Why Hansen Concedes the Point<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The host attributes Hansen\u2019s position to strategic necessity rather than conviction. Hansen has said publicly that the strong claim \u2014 that prophets never err \u2014 cannot survive the historical record, and so has adopted the position that prophets do err but must be followed anyway. The host calls this an attempt to affirm two mutually exclusive propositions at once, producing titles like Hansen\u2019s own<span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><em><strong> \u201cCan a prophet be wrong and still be a prophet?\u201d<\/strong> <\/em><\/span>The host\u2019s answer is a flat no.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #8b2635;\">\u25c6 \u25c6 \u25c6<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>The Widened Staircase<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Much of the episode\u2019s first half examines an illustration Hansen employs, drawn from a BYU professor\u2019s presentation. It depicts a staircase to heaven with two lines: one wandering back and forth but remaining on the stairs, representing prophets who err without leading the Church astray; and one departing entirely off the path, representing something the apologist insists has never happened.<\/p>\n<p>The host raises two objections. The illustration is unfalsifiable by design: no one can specify what magnitude of error counts as leaving the path, so the claim can never be tested. And the path has been drawn wide enough to accommodate every documented deviation \u2014 quietly abandoning the scriptural strait and narrow way, on which each of those wanderings is itself a departure.<\/p>\n<p>Applied to the priesthood ban, the illustration fails outright. From the perspective of a black Latter-day Saint living under it, the ban was not a deviation within the path but exclusion from the path altogether \u2014 barred from the ordinances the Church deems necessary to exaltation.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #8b2635;\">\u25c6 \u25c6 \u25c6<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\">\u201c<b>We Will Always Teach the Truth\u201d<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The host next plays a BYU address by Russell M. Nelson, in which the late Church president describes prophets and apostles as appointed to teach God\u2019s laws, states that they are commanded to teach truth, and concludes with an unqualified assertion.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i>Prophets are rarely popular, but we will always teach the truth.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #6f7073;\"><strong>\u2014 Russell M. Nelson, BYU address<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The host treats this as decisive against Hansen\u2019s framework. If the statement is true, the wandering line in the staircase diagram should be perfectly straight; there is no room in<span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><em><strong> \u201calways\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/span> for periodic doctrinal error. And if the statement is false, then a Church president speaking in his prophetic capacity has himself taught something untrue \u2014 which concedes the point by another route.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>The Moral Corollary<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The host presses further on Nelson\u2019s claim that prophets are commanded to teach truth. If that is so, then every occasion on which Hansen concedes prophetic doctrinal error becomes an occasion on which the prophets violated a divine commandment. The consequence, as the host frames it, is not merely that the leaders were mistaken but that they were disobedient \u2014 and, by Nelson\u2019s own logic that withholding revealed truth is uncaring, that they were also uncharitable toward the membership. Hansen\u2019s position, on this reading, places him in the awkward posture of correcting the prophets he is defending.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #8b2635;\">\u25c6 \u25c6 \u25c6<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>Motte and Bailey<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The host identifies Hansen\u2019s argument as a motte-and-bailey fallacy, explaining the medieval fortification behind the name: a small, easily defended stronghold atop a mound, paired with a larger, more useful but less defensible enclosure below. When the bailey is overrun, its inhabitants retreat to the motte.<\/p>\n<p>Applied to apologetics, the bailey is the desirable, expansive claim: prophets always teach the truth. It is also the claim most vulnerable to attack, since a single documented counterexample overruns it. When that happens, the apologist withdraws to the motte: prophets do make doctrinal mistakes, but never enough to lead the Church astray.<\/p>\n<p>The retreat is not the safe harbor Hansen imagines. Once doctrinal error is conceded, the member has no principled way to distinguish present teaching from future-acknowledged error \u2014 precisely the realization that has driven many out. The host also notes a shift: where defenders once conceded only trivial mistakes, they now concede moral and doctrinal ones, a change he credits to the information now freely available online.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>Redefining \u201cAstray\u201d<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The whole defense, the host contends, rests on a redefinition. Apologists now use<span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><em><strong> \u201castray\u201d<\/strong> <\/em><\/span>to mean completely and irretrievably lost, rather than its ordinary sense of being led off the correct path, even temporarily. The redefinition has a cost he considers fatal: it leaves believers with no method whatsoever for determining whether the Church has ever been led astray, or ever could be.<\/p>\n<p>A methodology that cannot in principle return a particular verdict is not inquiry but a device for guaranteeing a predetermined conclusion \u2014 like an experiment on the color of the sky that admits only evidence for redness, and thereby forecloses discovering that it is blue.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>Lines in the Sand<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>A viewer comment notes that Hansen concedes the need to draw a personal line for how much prophetic fallibility is too much. Hansen\u2019s line concerns same-sex marriage and transgender questions; the commenter\u2019s was misrepresentation of the Book of Mormon translation. The implication is sharp: the line\u2019s placement is preference, not principle \u2014 and Hansen\u2019s tolerates 126 years of racial exclusion while treating a prospective policy change as disqualifying.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #8b2635;\">\u25c6 \u25c6 \u25c6<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>The Deuteronomic Tests<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The second half turns from Hansen\u2019s reasoning to a scriptural standard. Does Scripture supply a means of testing a prophet? The host answers from Deuteronomy 18 \u2014 a passage that survives unaltered in the Joseph Smith Translation and therefore cannot be dismissed as corrupt. He observes that these tests are seldom taught in LDS Sunday School, and suggests the omission is not accidental.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i>But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. \u2026 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #6f7073;\"><strong>\u2014 Deuteronomy 18:20, 22 (KJV)<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>He is explicit that he is not invoking the capital penalty; he reads the death clause as Scripture\u2019s way of saying such a person was not sent by God. What matters is the epistemic conclusion: such a figure need not be feared, followed, or trusted.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>Test One: The Unfulfilled Prophecy<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The host applies this test to the Jackson County, Missouri, temple site dedicated by Joseph Smith on August 3, 1831 \u2014 which today holds markers and a visitor center but no temple. Doctrine and Covenants 84, presented as the word of Jesus Christ, specifies both location and timeframe.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i>Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation. For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #6f7073;\"><strong>\u2014 Doctrine and Covenants 84:4\u20135<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Nearly two centuries have elapsed. Verse 5, the host argues, forecloses the escape of treating <span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><em><strong>\u201cgeneration\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/span> as indefinitely elastic, since the revelation defines the term by the lifespans of those then living. He adds a dictionary treatment showing the word\u2019s ordinary senses are straightforward until apologetic necessity intervenes \u2014 and acknowledges candidly that he used the elastic reading himself during his own years as an apologist.<\/p>\n<h3 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><i><b>The Rule Against Surplusage<\/b><\/i><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Drawing on legal training, the host introduces maxims of statutory construction as a parallel. Courts cannot interrogate a legislature; they must recover meaning from the enacted text. Legislatures are presumed not to use redundant words; every clause must be given distinct meaning; and a reading that renders any portion void should be rejected where another reasonable reading gives it purpose.<\/p>\n<p>Applied to section 84, the point bites. If <span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><em><strong>\u201cin this generation\u201d<\/strong> <\/em><\/span>imposes no temporal limit, the phrase does no work at all \u2014 the apologetic meaning would be fully conveyed without it. Interpreters owe at least as much deference to words attributed to God as courts owe a legislature, and excising inconvenient clauses places the interpreter above the revelation he defends.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>Test Two: Presuming to Speak in God\u2019s Name<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The other test poses an evidentiary difficulty: how can one show that God did not give a prophet something to say? The host proposes that reversals supply the proof \u2014 where one prophet declares X as God\u2019s word and a successor declares not-X, both cannot have been speaking for God. In LDS ecclesiology, this is no small matter: the line of authority from Joseph Smith forward must be unbroken, since a false prophet anywhere in the chain disrupts the keys.<\/p>\n<h3 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><i><b>The 1949 First Presidency Statement<\/b><\/i><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The first case is the First Presidency statement of 1949 on the priesthood restriction, which expressly disclaimed the language of policy.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i>It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #6f7073;\"><strong>\u2014 First Presidency statement, 1949<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The statement calls the restriction doctrine a commandment, not administrative practice \u2014 while the Church\u2019s later Gospel Topics essay retroactively describes it as a policy leaders sought revelation to alter. The host puts the resulting choice starkly: if the ban was God\u2019s commandment, God is a racist; if it was not, the men who declared it so failed the Deuteronomic test. He sees no third option.<\/p>\n<h3 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><i><b>The 2015 Policy of Exclusion and Its 2019 Reversal<\/b><\/i><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The second case is the November 2015 handbook change \u2014 the policy of exclusion \u2014 which classified members in same-sex marriages as apostates and barred their children from baby blessings, baptism, ordination, and missionary service absent disavowal of their parents\u2019 relationship. Though remembered as policy, it was presented as revelation. In January 2016, Russell M. Nelson described the process in explicitly revelatory terms.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i>The Lord inspired His prophet to declare the mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #6f7073;\"><strong>\u2014 Russell M. Nelson, January 2016<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The host counts five distinct claims to revelation in that passage. Three and a half years later, in April 2019, the policy was reversed \u2014 and the reversal was likewise attributed to divine direction.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i>We recently felt directed to adjust the policy.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #6f7073;\"><strong>\u2014 Russell M. Nelson, April 2019<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This, the host argues, is the cleanest available demonstration. Either God reversed himself on a matter of grave moral consequence within forty-two months, or on at least one of those occasions the leaders spoke in God\u2019s name what God had not given them to speak. He considers the second far more probable \u2014 and under Deuteronomy 18, decisive.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #8b2635;\">\u25c6 \u25c6 \u25c6<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>Two Definitions of \u201cProphet\u201d<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The host closes by laying out the only two definitions he considers available. The first defines a prophet as one who does not err doctrinally and therefore ought to be followed \u2014 a definition the historical record destroys. The second defines a prophet as one who does err \u2014 accommodating history at the cost of producing someone who ought not be followed, because he is sometimes wrong and no one can tell when.<\/p>\n<p>The concluding difficulty is epistemic. The prophets evidently do not know when they are mistaken, since they would presumably not attribute a teaching to God if they did. If they cannot identify their own errors, members cannot identify them in advance either \u2014 and nothing they teach can be trusted at the moment it is taught, which is the only moment that matters.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #8b2635;\">\u25c6 \u25c6 \u25c6<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>The Closing Satire: \u201cInfallible Electronics\u201d<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The episode ends with a stand-up routine by a comedian performing as the Holy Roast. A customer shops for a calculator at a store called Infallible Electronics. The salesman guarantees it will never lead him astray, then reveals that questions must be submitted in advance, that some are simply not answered, and that the device has been horribly wrong in the past.<\/p>\n<p>Offered twelve more calculators to cross-check the first, he learns their consensus also changes over time \u2014 explained as a product of the culture of its era, or blamed on his own insufficient faith. He is directed to the president of the calculators, whose authority derives entirely from having outlived the others. Corrections, he is told, once took decades and sometimes 130 years. The device never announces an error; it goes silent on the question until customers forget the old answer.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i>The calculators will never be allowed to lead you astray.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u2014 The Holy Roast, \u201cInfallible Electronics\u201d<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The routine closes darkly. Assured that everything works out in the end \u2014 after death \u2014 and warned that refusal means eternal separation from family, the customer asks about those for whom it did not work. The salesman\u2019s answer, delivered as though it were mitigating, is that the casualties were mostly gay teenagers. The customer walks out.<\/p>\n<p>The host offers the sketch as his closing argument, contending that a position dismantled this efficiently by satire is a position in serious trouble.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #8b2635;\">\u25c6 \u25c6 \u25c6<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>Concluding Assessment<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The host ends on qualified acknowledgment. He credits Hansen for abandoning the indefensible claim that prophets do not err, reading the concession as evidence that apologists have been forced onto more honest ground by the availability of information. But Hansen has stopped one step short of the conclusion his own premises require: having granted colossal doctrinal error, the reasonable next move would be to loosen his hold on the Church\u2019s exclusive truth claims. Instead, he has doubled down \u2014 choosing, in the host\u2019s judgment, a hill on which he will die by a thousand cuts.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #5a5a5a;\"><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><i>Prepared from the full episode transcript. Quotations reproduced in brief for commentary and review.<\/i><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\">\u2766 \u2766 \u2766<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 class=\"western\" align=\"center\"><span style=\"color: #1f3864;\"><b>A NOTE ON METHOD AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>This summary was drafted with the assistance of Claude, an AI research and writing system developed by Anthropic, working under the author\u2019s direction and to the author\u2019s specifications.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Photo: This image shows Jacob Hansen channeling his inner Justin Martyr, minus that whole beheading by the Roman prefect Rusticus. Hansen is a Latter-day Saint businessman, father of four, seminary teacher, youth-football coach, surfer, hunter, sailor, Jiu-Jitsu enthusiast, and operator of Thoughtful Faith\u2014a channel apparently founded on the premise that a sufficiently busy man can&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":8718,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[44,45,238],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8717","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-latter-day-saints","category-mormonism","category-mormons"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/Jacob-Hansen-apologist.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8717","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8717"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8717\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8720,"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8717\/revisions\/8720"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8718"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8717"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8717"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8717"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}