Polygamy question

[Darth J]

I don't see the sense of looking to secular disciplines like anthropology in trying to figure out the reasoning of God--for his thoughts are not our thoughts.

I'm sure you don't. (Why are you on an apologetics board, then? Never mind.)

To do so would be to risk conforming God to the image of man, rather than vice-versa as God intends.

As opposed to trying to understand God consistent on the information available to us.

Oh, you know all those church leaders who talked about "the gospel" encompassing "all truth?" They were speaking as men/speculating/giving their own opinion/not giving official doctrine when they repeatedly said those things.

In fact, doing so tends to run contrary to the methods for descerning God's reasoning as he has revealed.

And which a media company owned by God's church has registered as an advertising technique.

At Bonneville Communications, our ability to touch the hearts and minds of audiences makes us an essential resource for organizations with vital messages. For more than 30 years, our creative professionals have designed public service and direct response messages for national nonprofit organizations such as the Huntsman Cancer Institute, Boy Scouts of America, National Hospice Foundation, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and The Salvation Army.

Our unique strength is the ability to touch the hearts and minds of our audiences, evoking first feeling, then thought and, finally, action. We call this uniquely powerful brand of creative "HeartSell"

[Scottie]

Why do any number of things that God simply commands.

GREAT question!!

[S.Ferreira]

For instance, all of those children Joseph Smith had with his plural wives, per this particular justification of polygamy..................

Even if Joseph Smith had no children with his plural wives, poligamy still created much wider family bonds than otherwise would have existed, binding children and parents, and opening a huge network of cousins, aunts, uncles.... This provided a family system of loyal and strong believers that helped many to weather some of the most dificult times from the period of Nauvoo through the settling of Deseret/Utah. Thus, fulfilling the justification many have mentioned of raising a seed up to the Lord.

[Jason]

And just look at all those people in central Utah, northern Arizona, Texas, and Canada who have polygamous ancestors that obeyed the commandment to engage in plural marriage and became stronger in the Church and raised up a righteous seed.

Despite the reference to current polygamist sects, there really were many people in those areas who became stronger in the Church and raised up righteous children.

[Jason]

Every child of a plural marriage knew by the example of their parent's actions (not just their words) that they considered obeying God more important than what the world thought of them.

[Darth J]

Despite the reference to current polygamist sects, there really were many people in those areas who became stronger in the Church and raised up righteous children.

Well, then the FLDS et al. have fulfilled God's promise, haven't they?

Should I take your post to mean that we can look to the fulfillment of God's promise by looking at the current descendants of polygamists, but only if they're currently members of the LDS Church?

[Darth J]

Every child of a plural marriage knew by the example of their parent's actions (not just their words) that they considered obeying God more important than what the world thought of them.

And that is why Mormons from Joseph Smith through the Second Manifesto were always up-front and honest about their practice of polygamy.

That would include the 14 years after Wilford Woodruff received a no-more-polygamy revelation and we all pinky-swore not to practice polygamy any more, but did anyway.

[Jason]

Should I take your post to mean that we can look to the fulfillment of God's promise by looking at the current descendants of polygamists, but only if they're currently members of the LDS Church?

As long as the polygamists in question were also members of the LDS Church, yes.

[Scottie]

Did any of the non-polygamist families raise up righteous generations of saints?

[Jason]

And that is why Mormons from Joseph Smith through the Second Manifesto were always up-front and honest about their practice of polygamy.

That would include the 14 years after Wilford Woodruff received a no-more-polygamy revelation and we all pinky-swore not to practice polygamy any more, but did anyway.

Irrelevent. The children saw their parents sacrificing to obey their covenants.

[Darth J]

Even if Joseph Smith had no children with his plural wives, poligamy still created much wider family bonds than otherwise would have existed, binding children and parents, and opening a huge network of cousins, aunts, uncles.... This provided a family system of loyal and strong believers that helped many to weather some of the most dificult times from the period of Nauvoo through the settling of Deseret/Utah. Thus, fulfilling the justification many have mentioned of raising a seed up to the Lord.

Which, per the continuing meme in contemporary Mormon apologetics that one must ignore what the scriptures say in order to explain what the scriptures say, doesn't quite fit the reason given in the Doctrine and Covenants.

But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.

D&C 132:63

For an example par excellence of "a dog ate my homework" vs. "this is what the scriptures say," see the laundry list of excuses reasons for polygamy that FAIR gives, none of which are in D&C 132.

http://en.fairmormon.org/Polygamy/Purpose_of_plural_marriage

Particularly interesting is the quote from Dallin H. Oaks: "It's not the pattern of the Lord to give reasons. We can put reasons to commandments. When we do we're on our own. Some people [have] put reasons to [commandments] and they turned out to be spectacularly wrong."

So the glory of God is intelligence, and it is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance (that was just Joseph Smith's opinion and/or they wrote it down wrong!).

But the God who is saving us give us rules we can't understand for no apparent reason.

[Darth J]

As long as the polygamists in question were also members of the LDS Church, yes.

So the reason for polygamy was fulfilled, but only sometimes.

[Jason]

So the reason for polygamy was fulfilled, but only sometimes.

Kind of like most of God's commands, isn't it?

[Darth J]

Irrelevent. The children saw their parents sacrificing to obey their covenants.

You said that the early polygamists didn't care about what the world thought. If you don't care about what the world thinks, then there is no reason to hide it or lie about it.

Now, this has changed to the children "saw their parents sacrificing to obey their covenants."

Yes, their parents sacrificed many things: their integrity (covering up), their honesty (lying about it), having a meaningful relationship with their wives (CFR: In Sacred Loneliness, or any other record of what it was actually like for the wives), having a meaningful relationship with and actually really getting to know their hordes of children.

Many, many sacrifices.

[Darth J]

Kind of like most of God's commands, isn't it?

Oh, yes. "I the Lord, am bound when you do what I say," so the Lord HAS to do what He says when we obey, but life doesn't really turn out that way, so again we have to ignore the scriptures in order to explain them.

[Jason]

You said that the early polygamists didn't care about what the world thought. If you don't care about what the world thinks, then there is no reason to hide it or lie about it.

Now, this has changed to the children "saw their parents sacrificing to obey their covenants."

For most of the timespan during which plural marriage was practiced by the Church it was openly practiced.

At least you do agree with me that a plural marriage is more difficult than a regular marriage.

[Jason]

Oh, yes. "I the Lord, am bound when you do what I say," so the Lord HAS to do what He says when we obey, but life doesn't really turn out that way, so again we have to ignore the scriptures in order to explain them.

Not everyone who seems to be doing just fine honoring their father and mother lives for very long either.

[Darth J]

For most of the timespan during which plural marriage was practiced by the Church it was openly practiced.

But when Joseph Smith lied about it, and when the Church published its position on marriage that Joseph Smith knew was false, and when the Church promised to stop polygamy as a condition of Utah statehood and to avoid the effects of the Edmunds-Tucker Act but then did it anyway for approximately a decade and a half, that was okay.

Does the "time span during which plural marriage was practiced" include Joseph and Fanny in the barn, or do you start from a different time?

At least you do agree with me that a plural marriage is more difficult than a regular marriage.

Living in a cardboard box is also more difficult than living in a house. The issue is whether the trade-off is worth it, since the justification for polygamy seems to be a moving target.

[Darth J]

Not everyone who seems to be doing just fine honoring their father and mother lives for very long either.

So the promises in the scriptures are just sort of advertising hype.

[Jason]

So the promises in the scriptures are just sort of advertising hype.

Is that what you honestly believe?

[Darth J]

Is that what you honestly believe?

Isn't that what you honestly believe? It's what you're saying.

[Jason]

Isn't that what you honestly believe? It's what you're saying.

What are you saying then?

[Darth J]

What are you saying then?

That very few Mormons believe what the scriptures actually say, or they wouldn't have to come up with all these ad hoc excuses of why the scriptures and real-life experience are frequently incompatible.

Feel free to substitute "the teaching of church leaders" for "scriptures" (as TBM's often do), because it still works.

[Jason]

That very few Mormons believe what the scriptures actually say, or they wouldn't have to come up with all these ad hoc excuses of why the scriptures and real-life experience are frequently incompatible.

Feel free to substitute "the teaching of church leaders" for "scriptures" (as TBM's often do), because it still works.

So what do you think the scriptures/teaching of church leaders actually say?

[Darth J]

So what do you think the scriptures/teaching of church leaders actually say?

Your guess is as good as mine. It's all good until something seems contrary to the current state of the evidence or doesn't fit the theory that apologists need it to fit, and then it's just they were speculating/their opinion/not doctrine/prophet is only a prophet blah blah blah.