Polygamy Doctrine = Not In The Bible

[Irondukesteve]

Read the Threads.

Abraham was a polygamist where do you think is now, heaven or hell?

What about all the other Jews that practiced polygamy?

[selek]

If what you say is true about abraham's child from hagar-then it would have to be true about Jacob's (Israel) children from any other but his first wife-yet God chose to covenant with ALL of His children and not just the children of Leah (who was his first and by your estimation only wife)-if your logic is correct then only these sons-Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun-would be legitamate in the eyes of God.

Does the bible, concerning jacob and his multiple wives and children, support your conclusions about polygamy always being a sin and adultery in God's eyes?

There'a also the fact that if this logic were to hold up, then the physical lineage of Jesus (descended from David the King (through Solomon his "illegitimate" son) would be doubly illegitimate. An illegitimate line descended from an illegitimate son.

Solomon's mother, Bathsheba was the wife of Uriah, whom David murdered. He, as heir, was earned through murder and adultery.

[ED500]

I fail to see how any of the scriptures in the original post condemn polygamy. If ED would like to clarify, I would appreciate it.

I don't see how anyone can say polygamy is evil by the Bible's standards. Some of the greatest prophets and annointed kings of the Bible were polygamists. Under the Law given by Moses, a man was sometimes obligated to have more than one wife. The Prophet Nathan himself gave wives to David. I think I trust Nathan, a prophet of the God of the Israel, over ED500.

I am looking for a command that God SPECIFICALLY commanded his People both in the OLD and NEW Testament to practice polgamy.

I've never claimed that there is a verse in the Bible that says God specifically commanded people in the Bible to practice plural marriage, and as far as I know, no other Mormon on this board has either.

Antley,

The case about Nathan/David was not necessarily and order for Polygamy from GOD.

remember Saul had one concubine - he also had only one wife:

2 Samuel 3

"........7And Saul had a concubine, whose name was Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah: and Ishbosheth said to Abner, Wherefore hast thou gone in unto my father's concubine? .........."

2 Samuel 12

".......... 7And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;

8And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

9Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the LORD, to do evil in his sight? thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the children of Ammon.

........."

From what I understand - is that God did not give David wives - He simply pass the care of Saul's household unto David. It is very important not to make a hasty conclusion that polygamy was Commanded by God especially if there are many biblical proofs that he wanted marriage between a MAN and a Woman only.

Exodus 20

"....1And God spake all these words, saying,

2I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

.... 14Thou shalt not commit adultery. ......17Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ***, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's. ........"

Deut 22

"......If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel. ......"

Leviticus 20

"............10And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

11And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

12And if a man lie with his daughter in law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood shall be upon them.

13If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

14And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you.

................"

Ephesians 5

"............ 31For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

32This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

..........."

[ED500]

Addendum,

If I made any insulting remarks in the past - I apologize.

It's frustrating when I myself resort to insult and not focus on the debate - by being factual.

I was hoping for a simple argument as far as what the Bible say. No personal attacks of any sort.

have a nice day.

Thanks.

[selek]

Addendum,

If I made any insulting remarks in the past - I apologize.

It's frustrating when I myself resort to insult and not focus on the debate - by being factual.

I was hoping for a simple argument as far as what the Bible say. No personal attacks of any sort.

have a nice day.

Thanks.

ED500,

You've already been given extensive bibical texts which counter your assertions yet you've attempted to deal with only a small portion of them.

Both Leah and Rachel were Jacob (Israel)'s wives- with no reproach- for the scriptures speak of God favoring each of them in turn.

This example and many others from the Bible counter your assertion.

Why are you refusing to acknowledge the contradiction?

David and Solomon did not fail God by having multiple wives- until they began acquiring them without his divine authorization- particularly in the case of Bethsheba. It was not multiple wives that was sinful, but foreign, idolatrous wives who distracted them from their sacred callings and duties.

The reason that SchlieffenPlan and others brought up the statements of Martin Luther and others is because they were, in their day, the preeminent Biblical scholars- and they don't agree with your dogmatic construction. Niether do the scriptures.

You are battling against the tide, hoping to make sand castles that can stand against the raging surf- buttressing your position with arguments that cannot fail to fall against the totality of the scriptures and history.

[simply_disappear]

hey! as an aside....I've been to the Mammoth Caves

have you been?

[selek]

Gen. 30: 1-2, 4

1 And when Rachel saw that she bare Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister; and said unto Jacob, Give me children, or else I die.

2 And Jacobâ??s anger was kindled against Rachel: and he said, Am I in Godâ??s stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb?

â?¢ â?¢ â?¢

4 And she gave him Bilhah her handmaid to wife: and Jacob went in unto her.

This scripture states that Bilhah was given as a wife, not a maid or concubine. Yet the scriptures do not condemn any of the four. That makes three wives Jacob/Israel had, yet he still stood in God's favor.

Add in Zilpah, (Leah's maid) and you have a total of four wives- yet God still blessed and prospered the family.

Finally, we have contradicting scriptures:

Gen. 30: 4

4 And she gave him Bilhah her handmaid to wife: and Jacob went in unto her.

and:

Genesis 35:22

22 And it came to pass, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his fatherâ??s concubine: and Israel heard it.

One verse says wife, the other says concubine. But in no way is Jacob ever punished for his relationship with these women.

[helix]

Heh, the initial post reminded me of an excerpt I read from the Southern Star's January 27, 1900 edition. This excerpt was part of an exchange between the mission president of the Southern States mission, President Rich, and Rev. J. Whitcomb Brougher of the First Baptist Church in Chattanooga. President Rich responded to similar anti-polygamy arguments by first mentioning a Tennessee law forbidding the teaching of polygamy in the state. He the continued,

"Abraham was a polygamist and the friend of God. God knew he was a polygamist when He made him His friend. Jacob had four wives, and their polygamous sons, we are informed, are to be honored by having their names inscribed over the pearly gates of the beautiful city. Suppose you were to fool Saint Peter and get into heaven, how would you feel clasped to the bosom of the polygamous Abraham? Do you suppose you can sufficiently humble yourself to go in at one of those polygamous gates and mingle with the polygamous sons of Jacob? Moses had more than one wife, and yet he was a Prophet of God. Just think of a polygamist leading the chosen people of the Lord. All the Judges of Israel and all her chosen kinds which were appointed by God, including Saul, David and Solomon, were polygamists, and the descendants of these polygamists were highly honored of the Lord. The Prophet Samuel, and even Jesus, our Savior, came through polygamous lineage. The Bible also says that polygamous relations shall exist in the last days when men would become decimated, that their scarcity would cause seven women to take hold of one man and desire to be called by his name to take away their reproach. Isa. 4-1. Are we not informed that David didn ot sin except in the case of Uriah, the Hitite? Did not the Lord say through Nathan the prophet that he, the Lord had given David Saul's wives? If all these parties could find favor with God, although they were polygamists and God knew it, would it be unscriptural to believe that polygamists might find favor with our Heavenly Father in these days? The Bible does not say that we shall have no more than one wife, and can we anything else out of these instances than that the Bible sanctions polygamy? Of course you will say that Paul says a Bishop is to be the husband of one wife, but we ask does he say a Bishop cannot have more than one wife? Now, from these passages of Scripture, I ask that the prisoner, the Bible, be convicted and punished under the laws of Tennessee"

[Calm]

My understanding of hebrew law (based on a book about biblical law) is that the hebrew term used for "concubine" is a form of legitimate marriage. The woman was considered a wife, just not with all the same legal ramifications that the other form of marriage had.

The children of Abraham and Jacob and David would not have been considered illegitimate by any law of that day.

If you want actual source and quotes, I'll get them; but I've typed them up for this topic before a couple of times and I'm not going to do it again unless requested.

[weaverl]

Yea, this post is a joke. Read the old testiment man.

[cksalmon]

lol if there ever was a biased and subjective question I think that would be it. You have left SOOO much out of there it is unreal. I thought at first that you dont know your scriptures. However, nwI think you do, but you are just choosing to leave out all the scriptures that talk about polygamy.

Polygamy was practiced in Jesus's day and it is even mentioned in the New testament. (Matthew 22:14-28)

Abraham practied polygamy. He was COMMANDED to take Hagar as a wife!! Surely you know this story.

You also forgot the scripture where Paul says that we should be single instead of being married(according to Catholic interpretation that is) Why didnt you ask about that? DO you think it is true and natural that we should live celebate lives instead of being married?

Steve--

How can one consider this example "polygamy" when each of the succeeding brothers, in this litmus test, were dead prior to the marrying of the spouse in question?

It's patently not an example of polygamy.

Best.

CKS

[selek]

Steve--

How can one consider this example "polygamy" when each of the succeeding brothers, in this litmus test, were dead prior to the marrying of the spouse in question?

It's patently not an example of polygamy.

Best.

CKS

I may be mistaken, but I believe His Lordship added the proviso about the subsequent brothers already being married.

Which would make the first instance bigamy, the second trigamy, then really really confusing.

[livy111us]

ED 500,

What do you make of the outlines that God lays out in relation to polygamy which I posted? It would not seem reasonable that God would explain the rules of something that is a sin. That is like reading in the Bible that prostitution is a sin, but if you are a prostitute, you must wear your hair in a bun, and what to do if a customer doesn't pay, etc.... It wouldn't make a lick of sense.

[Calm]

I may be mistaken, but I believe His Lordship added the proviso about the subsequent brothers already being married.

I don't see it being mentioned one way or the other, perhaps you could point out where you think this is indicated?

[selek]

I may be mistaken, but I believe His Lordship added the proviso about the subsequent brothers already being married.

I don't see it being mentioned one way or the other, perhaps you could point out where you think this is indicated?

Thank Heavens for the proviso "I may be mistaken...." I was.

I'd almost swear I saw it implied though- and you, Calmoriah, raised the issue of the widow and the brothers.

So no, it has not been stated, though clearly it is implied.

My bad.....

[Calm]

The question is based on the book of Tobit, IIRC. My memory says that the brothers were married to the widow when they came of age which means it's unlikely they would have been married. I'll have to check this out.

This reference says nothing about the state of the brothers, so I guess I'll have to actually look at the book instead of shortcutting with wiki!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Tobit

Back in a bit.

Tobit is a pretty quick read. The only thing I can find about the seven brothers (Tobias is not one of them, but a righteous young man who is a relative of the chaste Sara who is the bride) is this in Chap 6:

#

Then the angel Raphael said to him: Hear me, and I will shew thee who they are, over whom the devil can prevail.

For they who in such manner receive matrimony, as to shut out God from themselves, and from their mind, and to give themselves to their lust, as the horse and mule, which have not understanding, over them the devil hath power.

Book of Tobit

[Magical Alma]

I talked to my stake president and he said that you do not have to practice it to enter into the celestial kingdom. To be absolutely honest....I like the idea of a celestial companion. It is what I have always dreamed up since I was young. I love the idea of having a best friend who I share everything with. The idea of having multiple wives is not what I want out of a religion.

I know that in the past the church taught that we must practice polygamy to be exalted, but we have not taught that for over 100 years. I personally dont think that doctrine is an eternal truth. I think people can choose whether they want an eternal marriage with one or more people but both can inherit the highest degree in the celestial kingdom.

Please read D&C 132. It's still in our scriptures. Yes, nobody likes to talk about it, but that is because, like I said, they have allowed themselves to be moved by the common society and not really by Heavenly Father, who Himself gave us that scripture. It clearly says that you have to do it in order to be exalted in the Celestial Kingdom and if they are suddenly denying that now among LDS social groups, then I'm a monkey's uncle. Come on people, let's not be cafeteria saints now.

[Irondukesteve]

lol if there ever was a biased and subjective question I think that would be it. You have left SOOO much out of there it is unreal. I thought at first that you dont know your scriptures. However, nwI think you do, but you are just choosing to leave out all the scriptures that talk about polygamy.

Polygamy was practiced in Jesus's day and it is even mentioned in the New testament. (Matthew 22:14-28)

Abraham practied polygamy. He was COMMANDED to take Hagar as a wife!! Surely you know this story.

You also forgot the scripture where Paul says that we should be single instead of being married(according to Catholic interpretation that is) Why didnt you ask about that? DO you think it is true and natural that we should live celebate lives instead of being married?

Steve--

How can one consider this example "polygamy" when each of the succeeding brothers, in this litmus test, were dead prior to the marrying of the spouse in question?

It's patently not an example of polygamy.

Best.

CKS

They did practice polygamy in Jesus's day. If the husband already had a wife and his brother's wife died, then he had a duty to mary her aswell.

[Calm]

Please read D&C 132. It's still in our scriptures. Yes, nobody likes to talk about it

I have read it, I just don't agree with your "clear" interpretation, especially if one takes the rest of the scriptures into account as well as modern day revelation.

As to nobody liking to talk about, could have fooled me by the number of times it's brought up on the board.

[Irondukesteve]

I talked to my stake president and he said that you do not have to practice it to enter into the celestial kingdom. To be absolutely honest....I like the idea of a celestial companion. It is what I have always dreamed up since I was young. I love the idea of having a best friend who I share everything with. The idea of having multiple wives is not what I want out of a religion.

I know that in the past the church taught that we must practice polygamy to be exalted, but we have not taught that for over 100 years. I personally dont think that doctrine is an eternal truth. I think people can choose whether they want an eternal marriage with one or more people but both can inherit the highest degree in the celestial kingdom.

Please read D&C 132. It's still in our scriptures. Yes, nobody likes to talk about it, but that is because, like I said, they have allowed themselves to be moved by the common society and not really by Heavenly Father, who Himself gave us that scripture. It clearly says that you have to do it in order to be exalted in the Celestial Kingdom and if they are suddenly denying that now among LDS social groups, then I'm a monkey's uncle. Come on people, let's not be cafeteria saints now.

D&C 131 say that you need to enter into marriage. But I dont see where it says that it is mandatory to enter into polygamy. Polygamy was only practiced by an elite group in the church anyways. Correct me if I am wrong but only about 10% of the church brthren ever practiced it at one time. I have made my decision now and I will not be practicing polygamy in the next world.

Please read D&C 132. It's still in our scriptures. Yes, nobody likes to talk about it

I have read it, I just don't agree with your "clear" interpretation, especially if one takes the rest of the scriptures into account.

As to nobody liking to talk about, could have fooled me by the number of times it's brought up on the board.

Hear hear...

[Calm]

What is taught in the Church about Eternal Marriage:

http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,11-1-13-48,00.html

What is taught about the New and Everlasting Covenant:

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/gs/n/19

[Magical Alma]

D&C 131 say that you need to enter into marriage. But I dont see where it says that it is mandatory to enter into polygamy. Polygamy was only practiced by an elite group in the church anyways. Correct me if I am wrong but only about 10% of the church brthren ever practiced it at one time. I have made my decision now and I will not be practicing polygamy in the next world.

We are talking about D&C 132, are we not? You don't see where it says it is mandatory? Ignoring the countless doctrinal talks by Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, Heber C. Kimball, Joseph F. Smith, etc, that touch on this subject as essential and have not been denied as false doctrinal opinionated nonsense as of today, let's focus completely on this scriptural chapter that has been given to US to read:

D&C 132: 3-4

3: Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.

4: For behold, I reveal unto you a new and everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted into my glory.

D&C 132: 6

6: And as pertaining to a new and everlasting covenant it was instituted for the fulness of my glory and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.

END

Pretty cut and clear. As I said, it is essential to us as Latter-Day saints to respect our Heavenly Father's covenants and will. You can dismiss parts of our early teachings as opinionated, or maybe even false translation, but in this case, it's ingrained deeply in our teachings and history so much, that if you take it out, you will be removing quite the chunk of this foundation for our salvation. With this in mind, I have received spiritual confirmation of all the teachings in the scriptures, and though some of them are harder to accept than others, they are all true as indicated. (Also, it doesn't matter if only 10% or so practiced it, since we are only discussing celestial polygamy, not earthly, which has been abandoned to follow the laws of the land. You may have "made your decision" but you won't be fully exalted then.)

As to nobody liking to talk about, could have fooled me by the number of times it's brought up on the board.

I was discussing moreso in church discussions, rather than on this board, which likes to dwell in the negativity of this religion. I'm sure with that in mind, you'd agree with me that there is a large gap between the two. The problem is that many seem to relate this polygamy doctrine as negative, and thus, it is merely forgotten about in church discussions when we should embrace it.

[Irondukesteve]

Pretty cut and clear. As I said, it is essential to us as Latter-Day saints to respect our Heavenly Father's covenants and will. You can dismiss parts of our early teachings as opinionated, or maybe even false translation, but in this case, it's ingrained deeply in our teachings and history so much, that if you take it out, you will be removing quite the chunk of this foundation for our salvation. With this in mind, I have received spiritual confirmation of all the teachings in the scriptures, and though some of them are harder to accept than others, they are all true as indicated. (Also, it doesn't matter if only 10% or so practiced it, since we are only discussing celestial polygamy, not earthly, which has been abandoned to follow the laws of the land. You may have "made your decision" but you won't be fully exalted then.)

I am glad you have received spiritual confirmation of all the teachings in the scriptures. I on the other hand have not. I interpret scriptures in light of spiritual witness and rationality. Most people do this to varying degrees though many wont admit it. I see some scriptures as allegorical, as historical, as symbolic and some have more meaning to me than others. This has allowed me to retain a testimony of Joseph Smith as an inspired man. This has also allowed me to have faith in the BoA and in the Bible. I look more for inspiration, beauty, and divine light in whatever source it comes, egyptian religion, masonry, science, civil rights movements, charitable acts etc. I follow my inner light and the still small voice with wisdom and deep contemplation so as to not become a God unto myself. So far it has lead me here...to remain a member of the church and to walk like a toddler in short steps of faith. I unfortunately have not been able to take big leaps just yet to overcome my strong desire to be with my future wife and only with my future wife for time and all eternity. And if in the eternal world that option arises then I will take it and thank God that I was not tested as was Heber C. Kimball or Huntington.

[Calm]

You are required to demonstrate that in 132 plural marriage is equivalent to the new and everlasting covenant of marriage and not just that plural marriage must take place under the covenant of the new and everlasting covenant of marriage. The New and Everlasting covenant is discussed in the first part, the principle of plural marriage is discussed in the second part. It is not the only section that discusses different, but related principles.

According to Dallin H. Oaks, a marriage between a man and a woman is what the new and everlasting covenant of marriage is: "The ultimate and highest expression of womanhood and manhood is in the new and everlasting covenant of marriage between a man and a woman. Only this relationship culminates in exaltation." http://www.lds.org/pa/library/0,17905,4931-1,00.html

I think I'll take his understanding as a living apostle over yours.

Acceptance of plural marriage if undertaken under the new and everlasting covenant as an eternal principle is likely, imo, required for exaltation. But that does not mean that one must be a participant in a plural marriage, but rather support it.

As a practical demonstration, there were many righteous saints that heard the talks that BY and others gave about the principle of plural marriage that were not participants in a plural marriage. Reading their journals and other writings would indicate they had no doubt that they were still eligible for exaltation without it.

I have, btw, no personal issue with the concept of plural marriage. If it was reinstated in the church tomorrow I would be willing to live it wholeheartedly. I have no problem with believing it will be present in the highest degree of salvation. I have a much greater problem believing that God would separate loving spouses based solely on timing (one was a second spouse after the death of the first spouse, for example). I believe that the Lord will allow any relationship that will fulfill the full potential of godliness in mortal man and woman and this includes monogamy and polygamy.

[mnn727]

Pretty cut and clear....... The problem is that many seem to relate this polygamy doctrine as negative, and thus, it is merely forgotten about in church discussions when we should embrace it.

And completly thrown out by OD 1

EXCERPTS FROM THREE ADDRESSES BY PRESIDENT WILFORD WOODRUFF REGARDING THE MANIFESTO

......The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for . ....