John Dehlin - Why They Leave

[maxrep12]

Years ago, I posted this very same OP. One of the purposes of Johns slide show presentation was to inform church leaders of the importance of gaining a true understanding of what causes some people to leave the church. This new understanding would help them empathize with an individual who was experiencing doubts about the church, and that the member in question was actually being reasonable with regards to their new questions/doubts.

I also mentioned that the presentation was a kick in the teeth to some apologists. John, in a tactful manner, explained that personally attacking the questioner, or ascribing ill motives to them, was extremely counter productive as well as inaccurate. Critics have long been pointing this out.

When this thread was first posted, many refused to watch the presentation, including some who ran the board. Given recent events, a viewing of Johns presentation could be worthwhile. I'm confident the General Authority('s) involved in these events have viewed his slide show and have adjusted their stance from it.

[Duncan]

Was there evidence to suggest the brethren weren't aware of any of the reasons people leave? I am confident in their time in the Church they have run across one or two inactive members!

remember Elder Ben B. Banks' 1999 GC address

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/print/1999/10/feed-my-sheep?lang=eng

[maxrep12]

Was there evidence to suggest the brethren weren't aware of any of the reasons people leave? I am confident in their time in the Church they have run across one or two inactive members!

remember Elder Ben B. Banks' 1999 GC address

http://www.lds.org/g...-sheep?lang=eng

From your link :

"There are so many young people who wander aimlessly and walk the tragic trail of drugs, gangs, immorality, and the whole brood of ills that accompany these things"

Uh, yeah, drugs and immorality....Obviously Johns work would be new to you.

[Duncan]

From your link :

"There are so many young people who wander aimlessly and walk the tragic trail of drugs, gangs, immorality, and the whole brood of ills that accompany these things"

Uh, yeah, drugs and immorality....Obviously Johns work would be new to you.

he nor I am saying that drugs or immorality is all of the reasons people leave, he and I would point out others. What I am saying is I don't think that Dehlin's work was filling any void-I am confident the leaders know as per Elder Banks' address

and FYI I know more inactive members of the Church then active and I do talk to them and so I can say for me I know why they left if what they tell me is true-some people are drama queens, some feel alienated-fitting in, some did something wrong and feel like huck and rather then fess up just go inactive, transportation is a constant concern especially with one YSA ward in a city among others reasons

Edited June 23, 2012 by Duncan

[Deborah]

I've read some of John Dehlin and I don't think he does a service to those who are disaffected or to the church. Just my opinion, especially knowing personally some of the people he's influenced. I do think that ward leaders have a responsibility to reach out in love to such people and should be encouraging them to study the scriptures and pray, rather than participate in a community of those who feed and support each others' disaffection and apostasy.

[Tacenda]

I told my bishop my concerns in an email, basically JS polygamy, Mountain Meadows and blood atonement. Laugh some of you, but I'm not alone. My bishop hasn't emailed back anything. Dead silence for several months now. Why do leaders tell us not to write COB with problems but go to our bishops/sp with them instead. And when we do we get nothing?

The problem is that there are no answers out there for people like me. None, it is all faith driven. That's what my journey is right now. And I'm trying to get that personal relationship with the Savior, something I'd never been taught that I recall, in all my years as a LDS.

Staunch LDS, never once had testimony issues. Couldn't understand why people were telling us to work on our testimonies. I thought it was damage proof.

Now I believe we are joining the rest of the world and faith is where it's at, thank you very much!

[Deborah]

I told my bishop my concerns in an email, basically JS polygamy, Mountain Meadows and blood atonement. Laugh some of you, but I'm not alone.

I wonder why you approached him in an email rather than making an appointment and sitting down with him. An email isn't the way to approach such spiritual questions. I find that many people don't even read their emails or not on a regular bases, even when they list it on the ward list.

And I'm trying to get that personal relationship with the Savior, something I'd never been taught that I recall, in all my years as a LDS.

I really don't understand this kind of statement because it's always been my understanding as a convert that I needed to get a personal relationship with the Savior. Isn't that what the Sacrament is all about and scripture reading and study and prayer.

I want to add that one reason we are told not to approach GA's with questions is because you can't get a feeling for what is going on just from a letter or email. The Bishop if he is in tune will be able to reach out to the spiritual needs which are causing one to be concerned.

Edited June 23, 2012 by Deborah

[Tacenda]

I wonder why you approached him in an email rather than making an appointment and sitting down with him. An email isn't the way to approach such spiritual questions. I find that many people don't even read their emails or not on a regular bases, even when they list it on the ward list.

I really don't understand this kind of statement because it's always been my understanding as a convert that I needed to get a personal relationship with the Savior. Isn't that what the Sacrament is all about and scripture reading and study and prayer.

I want to add that one reason we are told not to approach GA's with questions is because you can't get a feeling for what is going on just from a letter or email. The Bishop if he is in tune will be able to reach out to the spiritual needs which are causing one to be concerned.

Yes, but not in those words. So I was a little late to the party I guess. Sorry if I offended you. As a convert you probably already knew about having that personal relationship possibly. I also don't hear that we must be "born again". I know, I know we were when we are baptised. But at 8 yrs. old I hadn't a clue about that. So this is the gist of that personal relationship thing. After the faith crisis, I've been listening to other faiths sermons, it's practically all Jesus talk. An eye opener for me. Do you think it's like that in our church?

[TAO]

Yes, but not in those words. So I was a little late to the party I guess. Sorry if I offended you. As a convert you probably already knew about having that personal relationship possibly. I also don't hear that we must be "born again". I know, I know we were when we are baptised. But at 8 yrs. old I hadn't a clue about that. So this is the gist of that personal relationship thing. After the faith crisis, I've been listening to other faiths sermons, it's practically all Jesus talk. An eye opener for me. Do you think it's like that in our church?

Hmmm... I think it must be specific to your ward. My ward talks a ton about Christ, and a ton about being "born again", and being "a new person" and a ton about "how we should serve the lord/what the Lord expects us to do."

The things in being Mormon that allowed me to obtain that personal testimony of God was Moroni's Promise, and a certain verse in Alma talking about faith being things which aren't seen. From there, I went to ask God whether he was there. That seems a bit circular of course; but I had already determined that I was willing to take that risk since it was better than the alternative scenarios. And so he answered. And I have always tried to keep a personal relationship with him sense... because that is what truly makes or breaks this religion, for me. The personal relationship with God is the most valuable part of it.

[why me]

After the faith crisis, I've been listening to other faiths sermons, it's practically all Jesus talk. An eye opener for me. Do you think it's like that in our church?

Most of the time. However, the lds have the book of mormon, the restoration, the witnesses, temple marriage, word of wisdom...quite a lot to talk about. And members seem to cover it. Having a personal relationship with heavenly father is stress in our church. That is who the lds pray to in the name of his son. How is your relationship with heavenly father? I have heard quite often in lds circles that our heavenly father is our father and that we can have a very personal relationship with him. Now that is very comforting.

[why me]

The problem is that there are no answers out there for people like me. None, it is all faith driven. That's what my journey is right now. And I'm trying to get that personal relationship with the Savior, something I'd never been taught that I recall, in all my years as a LDS.

Read Rough Stone Rolling by Richard Bushman. Many answers are there. This book could have been bought from Desseret three years ago. But you can perhaps find the paperback in bookshops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith:_Rough_Stone_Rolling

http://www.amazon.com/Joseph-Smith-Rough-Stone-Rolling/dp/1400042704

[Tacenda]

Yes, but not in those words. So I was a little late to the party I guess. Sorry if I offended you. As a convert you probably already knew about having that personal relationship possibly. I also don't hear that we must be "born again". I know, I know we were when we are baptised. But at 8 yrs. old I hadn't a clue about that. So this is the gist of that personal relationship thing. After the faith crisis, I've been listening to other faiths sermons, it's practically all Jesus talk. An eye opener for me. Do you think it's like that in our church?

I think my previous post didn't make sense, what I meant to say is it that I don't remember being told in these words "to have a personal relationship with the Savior" in fact when I went to give a RS lesson once on this very subject there is not much to go with it. I even stumbled onto this website a speech by Bruce R. Mcconkie at http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=6843 . And a quote by him below.

"Now I know that some may be offended at the counsel that they should not strive for a special and personal relationship with Christ. It will seem to them as though I am speaking out against mother love, or Americanism, or the little red schoolhouse. But I am not. There is a fine line here over which true worshipers will not step."

I believe Bruce R. Mcconkie was responding to this speech by George W. Pace found here: http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=6077

But did find this talk by James E. Faust found here http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1976.htm/ensign%20november%201976.htm/a%20personal%20relationship%20with%20the%20savior%20.htm?f=templates$fn=document-frame.htm$3.0$q=$x= that I used and loved!

I'm purely lazy when it comes to daily scripture study and know that this is my problem. Thanks for the reminder!

[cwald]

Read Rough Stone Rolling by Richard Bushman. Many answers are there. This book could have been bought from Desseret three years ago. But you can perhaps find the paperback in bookshops.

http://en.wikipedia....h_Stone_Rolling

http://www.amazon.co...g/dp/1400042704

I bought it at Desseret just last week.

[SamIam]

I also don't hear that we must be "born again". I know, I know we were when we are baptised. But at 8 yrs. old I hadn't a clue about that.

“Purifying and sealing by the Holy Spirit of Promise constitute the culminating steps in the process of being born again.” (Elder David A. Bednar, Ensign May 2007)

“We are commanded and instructed to so live that our fallen nature is changed through the sanctifying power of the Holy Ghost. President Marion G. Romney taught that.....“The baptism of fire is the consummation.” (Elder Dave Bednar, CR Oct 2007).

This baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost here spoken of by Nephi (referring to 2 Nephi 31:17) effects the great change in the hearts of men referred to by Alma (the mighty change). It converts them from carnality to spirituality,. It cleanses, heals, and purifies the soul. It is the sealing and sign of forgiveness. It is the spiritual rebirth spoken of by Jesus to Nicodemus. Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repentance, and water baptism are all preliminary and prerequisite to it, but it is the consummation. To receive it is to have one's garments washed in the atoning blood of Christ.” (Elder Marion G. Romney, “Look to God and Live”, p. 269, the last sentence quoted by Elder David Bednar in CR Oct 2007).

“Receiving the Holy ghost is the baptism by fire which truly begins the process of becoming like Jesus.”

(Bruce C. Hafen, BYUI, Feb 2008)

“We sometimes speak of baptism for the remission of sins. The remission, if you will read the scriptures carefully, comes through the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost.” (Elder Boyd K. Packer, Ensign, August 2006).

“Once we have truly repented, Christ will take away the burden of guilt for our sins. We can know for ourselves that we have been forgiven and made clean. The Holy Ghost will verify this to us; He is the Sanctifier. No other testimony of forgiveness can be greater.” (Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf, Ensign May 2007)

“If one does not receive the great gift of the Holy Ghost, then it is his fault that he hasn't been spiritual enough or close enough to heavenly Father” (Spencer W. Kimball, “Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball” p22-23, as quoted in “Doctrines of the Gospel” student manual p45)

“All members of the Church are enjoined at their confirmation to “receive the Holy Ghost.” Those who receive Him become Saints; those who do not are halted in their progression toward the kingdom of God. “We have a great many members of this Church who have never received a manifestation through the Holy Ghost. Why? Because they have not made their lives conform to the truth.” (Joseph Fielding smith, “we Are Here to Be Tried, Tested, proved,” BYU Speeches, October 1961, as quoted in “Doctrines of the Gospel” student manual, p44)

“The statement “receive the Holy Ghost” in our confirmation was a directive to strive for the baptism of the Spirit. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught: “You might as well baptize a bag of sand as a man, if not done in view of the remission of sins and getting of the Holy Ghost. Baptism by water is is but half a baptism, and is good for nothing without the other half—that is, the baptism of the Holy Ghost” (History of the Church, 5:499). We were baptized by immersion in water for the remission of sins. We must also be baptized by and immersed in the Spirit of the Lord, “and then cometh a remission of your sins by fire and by the Holy Ghost” (2 Nephi 31:17).” (Elder David A. Bednar, Ensign May 2006).

President Harold B. Lee said: “If the time comes when you have done all that you can to repent of your sins … and have made amends and restitution to the best of your ability … , then you will want that confirming answer as to whether or not the Lord has accepted of you. In your soul-searching, if you seek for and you find that peace of conscience, by that token you may know that the Lord has accepted of your repentance” (Stand Ye in Holy Places [1974], 185).

Ye Must Be Born Again Elder David A. Bednar May 2007

The Lord's authorized servants repeatedly teach that one of the principal purposes of our mortal existence is to be spiritually changed and transformed through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Alma declared: (quotes Mosiah 27:25-26). We are instructed to “come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny [ourselves] of all ungodliness(Moroni 10:32), to become “new creatures” in Christ (see 2 Cor. 5:17), to put off “the natural man” (Mosiah 3:19), and to experience a “a mighty change in us, or in our hearts, that we have no more disposition to do evil, but to do good continually” (Mosiah 5:2). Please note that the conversion described in these verses is mighty, not minor—a spiritual rebirth and fundamental change of what we feel and desire, what we think and do, and what we are. Indeed, the essence of the gospel of Jesus Christ entails a fundamental and permanent change in our very nature made possible through our reliance upon “the merits, and mercy, and grace of the Holy Messiah” 2 Nephi 2:8. As we choose to follow the Master we choose to be changed—to be spiritually reborn.

Finding Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ Elder Robert D. Hales, Ensign Nov 2004

Elements of Enos' faith building experience:

1-Enos heard the gospel truths from his father 2-he let his father's teachings about “eternal life, and the joy of the saints” sink deep into his heart. 3-He was filled with a desire to know for himself whether these teachings were true and where he himself stood before his Maker. 4-Enos obeyed the commandments of God.

We cannot find Enos-like faith without our own wrestle before God in prayer. I testify that the reward is worth the effort.

The pattern is:

1-hear the word of God, spoken and written by His servants.

2-let that word sink deep into your heart;

3-hunger in your soul for righteousness. To use Enos's words, “My soul hungered.” By this intense spiritual appetite, Enos qualified himself to receive the Savior's promise: “Blessed are all they who do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for the shall be filled with the Holy Ghost.”

4-obediently follow gospel laws, ordinances, and covenants; Enos obeyed the commandments of God, which enabled him to be receptive to the Spirit of the Holy Ghost.

5-raise your voice in mighty prayer and supplication, asking in faith to know that Jesus Christ is our Savior.

The promise: I promise that if you do these things sincerely and unceasingly, the words Christ spoke to His disciples will be fulfilled in your life: “Ask, and it shall e given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.”(Matt 7:7)

It wasn't easy. Faith did not come quickly. In fact, Enos characterized his experience in prayer as a “wrestle which [he] had before God.” but faith did come. By the power of the Holy ghost, he did receive a witness for himself.

To my dear friend and all those whose souls are hungering for faith, I invite you “to seek this Jesus of whom the prophets and apostles have written.” Let their witness that the Savior gave His life for you sink deep into your heart. Seek a witness of the truth through the Holy Ghost in prayer, and then see your faith strengthened...”

Then Enos testified: “there came a voice unto me, saying: Enos, thy sins are forgiven thee, and thou shalt be blessed…wherefore, my guilt was swept away.” (Enos 1:5,6) When he inquired of the Lord how this had been accomplished, the Lord answered him: “Because of thy faith in Christ…thy faith hath made thee whole.” (Enos 1:8, italics added.) Enos was spiritually healed. Through his mighty supplication to God, he experienced what the faithful of any dispensation can, do, and must experience if they are to see God and be filled with His Spirit. Become acquainted with Enos and the entire Book of Mormon, the greatest book in the world—a new witness for Christ. It is written for us today. This I know.”(

Work President Ezra Taft Benson, Ensign, First Presidency Message, September 1990)

Sometimes it is not that a message is not being delivered but simply that we have not been ready to hear it at the moment of its delivery. As we mature, the spirit may bring a new focus to you and you might begin hearing something you have missed a hundred times before but now you are more sensitive it it and all of the various ways it can be referenced. IT is a good sign that you have begun to hear the message - continue forward.

Edited June 23, 2012 by SamIam

[Tacenda]

Most of the time. However, the lds have the book of mormon, the restoration, the witnesses, temple marriage, word of wisdom...quite a lot to talk about. And members seem to cover it. Having a personal relationship with heavenly father is stress in our church. That is who the lds pray to in the name of his son. How is your relationship with heavenly father? I have heard quite often in lds circles that our heavenly father is our father and that we can have a very personal relationship with him. Now that is very comforting.

I guess this is where I fell off the tracks, they do speak of the relationship with heavenly father. Sorry. I guess that was the need for the talk by Bruce R. Mcconkie. He said you go through the Savior to get to the Father. And to other christians they think Jesus is the Father in the flesh. So yeah, it's confusing. Thank you. Also I did get through a little bit of Rough Stone Rolling. I checked it out of the library. I guess I need to check it out again.

[why me]

I think my previous post didn't make sense, what I meant to say is it that I don't remember being told in these words "to have a personal relationship with the Savior" in fact when I went to give a RS lesson once on this very subject there is not much to go with it. I even stumbled onto this website a speech by Bruce R. Mcconkie at http://speeches.byu....der.php?id=6843 . And a quote by him below.

"Now I know that some may be offended at the counsel that they should not strive for a special and personal relationship with Christ. It will seem to them as though I am speaking out against mother love, or Americanism, or the little red schoolhouse. But I am not. There is a fine line here over which true worshipers will not step."

I believe Bruce R. Mcconkie was responding to this speech by George W. Pace found here: http://speeches.byu....der.php?id=6077

But did find this talk by James E. Faust found here http://library.lds.o...me.htm$3.0$q=$x= that I used and loved!

I'm purely lazy when it comes to daily scripture study and know that this is my problem. Thanks for the reminder!

We are also told to have a personal relationship with our heavenly father. So, we are told to have at least two personal relationships: with heavenly father and with his son. Not bad. The lds have a personal relationship with jesus by following his commandments to the best of their ability and with the father through personal prayer. I think that the lds have it pretty much covered.

[why me]

I guess this is where I fell off the tracks, they do speak of the relationship with heavenly father. Sorry. I guess that was the need for the talk by Bruce R. Mcconkie. He said you go through the Savior to get to the Father. And to other christians they think Jesus is the Father in the flesh. So yeah, it's confusing. Thank you. Also I did get through a little bit of Rough Stone Rolling. I checked it out of the library. I guess I need to check it out again.

Read it with an open mind. And remember that Joseph was not perfect. He admitted this many times and I have a quotation by him in my sig line. You can read it below my post. He says to the audience: i am not righteous, I am not righteous. That is quite an admission to make. He knew his faults.

[why me]

When this thread was first posted, many refused to watch the presentation, including some who ran the board. Given recent events, a viewing of Johns presentation could be worthwhile. I'm confident the General Authority('s) involved in these events have viewed his slide show and have adjusted their stance from it.

I think that the problem now is that John through his podcasts may be encouraging people to leave. And if so, the game as changed. And it is here that there needs to be debate. John in his podcasts seems to be actually addressing question that he had in the beginning of his podcasts. In fact, if you listen carefully, he is learning from the answers given to his questions. He is actually not an interviewee but a student.

Now, it seems that he is trying to find reasons to stay out or leave the church. And so, the new podcasts may not have the same goal as the first series. But I may be mistaken. I am not perfect.

[Tacenda]

I think that the problem now is that John through his podcasts may be encouraging people to leave. And if so, the game as changed. And it is here that there needs to be debate. John in his podcasts seems to be actually addressing question that he had in the beginning of his podcasts. In fact, if you listen carefully, he is learning from the answers given to his questions. He is actually not an interviewee but a student.

Now, it seems that he is trying to find reasons to stay out or leave the church. And so, the new podcasts may not have the same goal as the first series. But I may be mistaken. I am not perfect.

I hope he keeps with his stance that members can stay even when their beliefs change. I think he is just attending occasionally to stay in good grace with the church. I think he stays because he wants to help those that need his help. But honestly I think he is only there in a physical sense, like so many that are going for family reasons. And sorry John if you are reading. I bet it get's tiring to be talked about so much.

[Freedom]

I told my bishop my concerns in an email, basically JS polygamy, Mountain Meadows and blood atonement.

The question I often respond with to these type of concerns is, why are they a concern? If there was polygamy in the old testament, why wouldn't there by polygamy today? If a group of members are feeling threatened and are prone to make irrational decisions in light of their circumstances, why wouldn't a tragedy like Mountain Meadow occur? If one of the tenants of our religion is that prophets are not zombies, why wouldn't erroneous teachings show up from time to time and subsequently be corrected? To have concerns over these matters would mean you must be horrified by the bible. Nothing in church history comes close to the more ancient text in our canon.

The church is an organization guided but not completely controlled by revelation. the foundation of the church is the Word of God. Our testimony is based on this foundation. If we reject the foundation because of people who come along from time to time commissioned to sustain this foundation then we are missing the point. I would never reject vegetables if the grocer is an alcoholic and I would never abandon physical exercise if I found out a professional athlete uses steroids. The two are not related.

[ERayR]

I'm purely lazy when it comes to daily scripture study and know that this is my problem. Thanks for the reminder!

This can cause some problems but it can be remedied.

[Tacenda]

The question I often respond with to these type of concerns is, why are they a concern? If there was polygamy in the old testament, why wouldn't there by polygamy today? If a group of members are feeling threatened and are prone to make irrational decisions in light of their circumstances, why wouldn't a tragedy like Mountain Meadow occur? If one of the tenants of our religion is that prophets are not zombies, why wouldn't erroneous teachings show up from time to time and subsequently be corrected? To have concerns over these matters would mean you must be horrified by the bible. Nothing in church history comes close to the more ancient text in our canon.

The church is an organization guided but not completely controlled by revelation. the foundation of the church is the Word of God. Our testimony is based on this foundation. If we reject the foundation because of people who come along from time to time commissioned to sustain this foundation then we are missing the point. I would never reject vegetables if the grocer is an alcoholic and I would never abandon physical exercise if I found out a professional athlete uses steroids. The two are not related.

Positive perspective but so hard to achieve. When evil men are doing the revealing it makes one really just want to go straight to the Lord and avoid man made philosophies. That's why it's so hard to become motivated to read scriptures, it's all through men mostly. And how many women are spoken of in the BOM? Being as you're a man you probably don't understand what women feel like especially when they are so overlooked and taken advantage of. I think polygamy is abusive even though you many not think so. In the bible it wasn't commanded to have polygamy, I've read sources that challenge anyone to find a scripture that commands it. It is likely to condemn it. And about Mountain Meadows, I've just found out about a person that had researched MM and it was what eventually led them out of the church. I know the church wants us to just leave things like this behind but for some it's difficult especially when they didn't learn of it until much later in life.

[Calm]

I've read sources that challenge anyone to find a scripture that commands it.

You don't think Levirate marriage at least includes the possibility?

[Tacenda]

You don't think Levirate marriage at least includes the possibility?

I c/p from the website below, I don't think Heavenly Father desired anyone to practice polyamy.

http://www.bibletruths.net/Archives/BTAR324.htm

There are indications that from early on, pagan nations freely practiced polygamy. Notwithstanding, we continue to read of men in the Bible who were manifestly monogamous (one wife only). It is evident that Adam, Noah, Job, Isaac, and Joseph (Jesus’step-father) to name some, were monogamous. After mentioning the reality of monogamy in a general milieu of pagan polygamy, I must also concede the existence of more than one wife among God’s people. Lemech, Abraham, Esau, Jacob, and Gideon all had more than one wife (Gen. 4: 19; Gen. 16; Gen. 26: 34, 28: 9; Gen. 29: 30; Judges 8: 30). (See addendum.)

Even in circumstances of recorded polygamy or polygyny, we can read of domestic disturbance due to competitiveness and resentment among the women (cp. Gen. 29: 30-34, Deut. 21: 15-17, 2 Chroni. 11: 21). In fact, most of the unrest in the Middle East today that is having global effects can be traced back to polygamy and the resulting rivalry (Abraham, Sarai and Hagar, Gen. 16).

An expressed prohibition against polygamy. Those who contend that the Bible never negatively treats polygamy are wrong. Consider the warning given to prospective and actual kings of Israel:

"16: But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way. 17: Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold" (Deut. 17).

Notice the three "shall nots," multiply horses, multiply wives, multiply silver and gold. Solomon is often sited as proof for the practice of polygamy being right, but Solomon was wrong in all three areas. Solomon had a vast number of horses; he had riches unparallel; and seven hundred wives (I Kgs. 4: 26; Eccl. 1-10; I Kgs. 11: 3). Hence, to use the example of Solomon and his seven hundred wives to argue for polygamy is an example of how simplistically a subject can be approached and dialectically presented.

The ideal marriage, according to God. The very first marriage, Adam and Eve, in many ways serves as a prototype, if you will. Notice that God knew that it was not good that Adam be alone and God provided for Adam a "help meet" (counter part that was a complement to Adam, Gen. 2: 18). Observe how God did not simply provide another man, but for Adam God made woman, the "glory of the man" (Gen. 2: 18ff., I Cor. 11: 7ff.). Hence, same sex marriage is not part of God’s arrangement for the marriage bond (see Rom. 1: 22ff.). Moreover, appreciate the fact that when God instituted marriage, it was one man and one woman (Gen. 2). If polygamy is the "ideal," as some are teaching, why, then, did not God create Eve, Sue, Jane, etc. for Adam?

Some of the most beautiful teaching relative to the intimacy and duration of marriage resides in Malachi 2:

"14: Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant. 15: And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth."

Notice how the practice of many wives just does not fit into the passage. However, how about all the references to polygamy in the Bible?

Just because the Bible mentions a trait or act of an individual, even a godly person, does not necessarily mean that the Bible endorsed such. The mentioning of Noah becoming drunk and disgracing himself is mentioned, but certainly not condoned (Gen. 9: 20ff.). I submit that God was not pleased with polygamy, an aberrant from the monogamous marriage God put in place, but that he did two things: (1). God tolerated polygamy during the maturation of his people and (2) he sought to regulate the evil practice.

We know that God intended for one man, one woman and that this relationship was to be for the duration (Matt. 19: 4ff., the only allowable cause for divorce is fornication). Yet, we also read of a divorce provision for a cause other than fornication (Deut. 24: 1-4). This divorce concession was not given for the pleasure of flippant husbands, but was actually for the protection of the women. Thus it was relative to polygamy. God put in place monogamous marriage, but man within a short time became dissatisfied with one woman (Gen. 4: 19). Hence, God then sought to regulate the polygamous practice (Ex. 21: 10). Notwithstanding, God was never pleased with polygamy or divorce for a cause other than fornication (cp. Mal. 3: 16).

Polygamy is expressly denounced pertaining to the leaders of God’s people.

"2: A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach," "6: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly" (I Tim. 3; ***. 1).

The expression "husband of one wife" (andra mias gunaikos) was provided by the Holy Spirit and must be respected. The Holy Spirit could have worded this requirement a number of ways. This construction requires marriage (present marriage) but forbids polygamy.

Thus in the case of the Hebrew leaders (the kings) and in the case of the rulers of God’s people today (cp. Heb. 13: 17), having more than one wife is expressly forbidden. Why would one think such would not also follow regarding those under these men?

In closing, we must realize that emotionalism and popularity do not establish God’s norm. I am aware that one of the world’s largest religions (Islam) has in place in its teaching (Koran) that in certain circumstances, a man may have more than one wife (Mohamed had ten wives). Some believe that today there are up to sixty thousand Mormon polygamists in Utah. As seen, polygamy is practiced even legally in many places in one third of the world’s population and that there is a movement underway to legalize multiple wives in America. However, God’s teaching remains one man, one woman (Matt. 19: 4ff., I Cor. 7, Rom. 7: 3, 4, Eph. 5: 22ff.). "God no longer "winks at ignorance, but now commandeth all men every where to repent" (Acts 17: 30). (For more study on the subject of polygamy, visit "An Exchange on Polygamy").

Addendum: We can historically establish the existence of polygamy among the Hebrews from Lamech, six generations from Adam, to about the time of the Babylonian exile. From the time of the exile, history is silent regarding the presence of polygamy among the Jews. By the time of the New Testament, polygamy appears to have been the exception and monogamy the norm even among the Gentiles and Romans.

[Calm]

monogamy the norm

Unless something occurred that wiped out a majority of males, monogamy has to always be the norm. Polygyny as the norm requires a minimum of twice as many women as men.

You did not address the commandment of Levirate marriage in your reference. What do you think about that?

Edited June 23, 2012 by calmoriah