Was Polygamy A Church Mistake?

[Calm]

Polygamy is still being practiced today in the church.  Men continue to be sealed to more than one wife in cases of death and remarriage. 

And women are sealed to multiple men.

[JLHPROF]

And women are sealed to multiple men.

 

We've discussed this before and I don't particularly want to debate the issue.

But we have based on history of plural marriage some idea as to how an eternal family with one husband and multiple wives would operate.

 

Purely speculatively, how would a family with multiple husbands and wives all sealed together operate would you think?  When it came to eternal increase?  When it came to living arrangements?  When it came to taking someones name (an eternal principle)?  When it came to naming any offspring?  When it came to heirship (another eternal principle)?

 

I really just don't see anything but chaos.  God can do more than I can imagine, but I just don't see this working.  I truly believe that a woman can only have one eternal companion, regardless of sealing.

But, like I said, we've debated this before.  I just can't imagine such a family based on the principles of family order God has already revealed.

[Calm]

Law of adoption taught a totally different eternal family order than we teach today.  I am perfectly happy to wait until further light and knowledge is revealed (or I die and get there if that comes first) to find out what marriage relationships will be like in the eternities.

 

We cannot really imagine, imo, but only fool ourselves into thinking we can, what relationships can be like without the feelings of jealousy, possessiveness, arrogance, the need to acquire honor rather than just allowing it to come because we deserve it etc.  Because of this I think marriage will be nothing like we imagine it now.

[Teancum]

Law of adoption taught a totally different eternal family order than we teach today. I am perfectly happy to wait until further light and knowledge is revealed (or I die and get there if that comes first) to find out what marriage relationships will be like in the eternities.

We cannot really imagine, imo, but only fool ourselves into thinking we can, what relationships can be like without the feelings of jealousy, possessiveness, arrogance, the need to acquire honor rather than just allowing it to come because we deserve it etc. Because of this I think marriage will be nothing like we imagine it now.

What makes you think that if there is a next world we won't enter it with all the baggage you mention above?

Why do you want to wait for further light and knowleldge? Have you asked yourself if perhaps it is all a man made thing? For me at least all the difficult issues are really indefenisble. Further light and knowledge only means you don't know, it does not make sense and it allows you to not face the conclusion that what you thought was true is not.

I know this is a tough road to how because I have been down it. I clinged to what I thought was true but came to the point that I realized I would never do the mental gyrations I needed to do to continue to think things that were godly for the LDS church and Joseph Smith I would never do for some other fanastical claims. That is when everything crumbled.

When I read these essays, read the hoops apoligists jump through to defend the idefensible knowing they would not do this for some other thing.... well the outcome seems pretty apparent to me. And it has been devasting.

Edited October 26, 2014 by Teancum

[Calm]

Because I know enough.

[KevinG]

The attitudes of prove it to me, and I won't believe it since it is distasteful to me, has been the downfall of many.

[Teancum]

Because I know enough.

Ahh a non answer.

[SmileyMcGee]

Not for everyone. I believe that it was restored by God to man. It was a commandment and is an eternal law.

But then, the idea of it has never bothered me. Perhaps if it bothered me I would try to make it illegitimate too.

I couldn't care less what you think about it. It was a disgusting practice, despite the "doctrinal" justifications. Edited October 26, 2014 by SmileyMcGee

[DJBrown]

Or is it still a heavenly commandment for exaltation? D&C 132 talks about it and Brigham Young in his Journal of Discourses said that the only people who become gods are the ones that enter into polygamy. We don't practice it anymore, except for those that lose a loved one and then remarry like 2 of my uncles, but should worthy men members expect to be provided multiple wives in heaven to help populate their multiple worlds with spirit children? It does make sense, but it sounds kind of unfair to the women of the church. How does this all work out?

 

Was it a "mistake" for God to ask Abraham to offer Isaac?

[rockpond]

I think God did try to correct the mistake. In multiple ways.

I read the verses you quoted as commanding us to enter the new and everlasting covenant. Not necessarily polygamy though if you believe that it is a verbatim dictation/revelation than you'd have to assume that He was making references to Joseph having more than one wife.

Which I believe it was. The verses are pretty clear. I even bolded some phrases for ease.

If 132 was a verbatim revelation for everyone to practice polygamy, where is the corresponding verbatim revelation freeing us from that obligation?

A very good question. We know that the manifesto was issued directly - "I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. " - Wilford Woodruff.

But we also know even from these new essays, that the Manifesto was never intended to end plural marriage completely.

But here's the big problem I have with your "verbatim revelation" theory -- Joseph didn't write it down until years after he started the practice. Wouldn't it be tought to remember something word for word 12 years later? (See the church's gospel topics essay for reference)

"He then requested me to get paper and prepare to write. Hyrum very urgently requested Joseph to write the revelation by means of the Urim and Thummim, but Joseph, in reply, said he did not need to, for he knew the revelation perfectly from beginning to end."

AND

"Two or three days after the revelation was written Joseph related to me and several others that Emma has so teased, and urgently entreated him for the privilege of destroying it, that he became so weary of her teasing, and to get rid of her annoyance, he told her she might destroy it and she had done so, but he had consented to her wish in this matter to pacify her, realizing that he knew the revelation perfectly, and could rewrite it at any time if necessary."

- William Clayton Affidavit.

So Joseph received the revelation word-for-word from the Lord. Kept it to himself for 12 years. Then dictated it verbatim. Surely after such a miracle we would have published that to the general church. Right? No?

Well surely when we got out to Utah we'd canonize such a revelation, right? Or did it take a several decades?

But let's assume it is verbatim, it still doesn't contain a commandment to practice polygamy. It does acknowledge Joseph's practice of it, but doesn't command him to take on extra wives. Similarly, OD1 (deemed an "inspired statement" in the latest church essay) doesn't command that the practice be stopped.

[rockpond]

The attitudes of prove it to me, and I won't believe it since it is distasteful to me, has been the downfall of many.

I don't find it distasteful. I'm glad that it was been decriminalized in Utah. Nor am I asking anyone to prove it to me. I've studied it out for myself and I believe it was a mistake.

[JLHPROF]

I couldn't care less what you think about it. It was a disgusting practice, despite the "doctrinal" justifications.

 

Thank you for exactly proving my point.  Much appreciated.

[3DOP]

I couldn't care less what you think about it. It was a disgusting practice, despite the "doctrinal" justifications.

 

For goodness sake, Smiley McGee, I am not even Mormon and I couldn't say that. All Christians have to admit that polygamy was permissible during the times of the patriarchs. It doesn't seem unreasonable that God might permit it at one time and not at another in our own epoch too. When King David was condemned for his adultery with Bathsheba, the prophet Nathan, speaking in the name of the Lord, proclaimed that God had given him his other wives. I can find the reference if need be.

 

I am against polygamy now, as a Catholic. I am obliged to believe that polygamy has been prohibited since the times of Christ. But polygamy cannot be inherently evil. Polygamy can only be currently prohibited, which is my position. Polygamy can be currently prohibited but has to be less than disgusting for anyone who accepts the Old Testament. Think about the Psalms. Can our Scriptures be written by someone who did that which was objectively disgusting in the eyes of God?

Edited October 26, 2014 by 3DOP

[Calm]

Ahh a non answer.

There are somethings I've experienced that would be meaningless to anyone else so sharing it wouldn't provide answers to anyone else.  I could use a lot of words to say the same thing and usually do, but for once I thought I would spare people.

 

I have never said that I haven't asked if what I've thought about things weren't true.  I am constantly changing my beliefs and opinions, especially as I encounter thoughtful and informed nonmembers and so far am tending to let go of more than I add.  I think I had a huge headstart because for some reason I have no clue about even though I am BIC, I grew up thinking Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were jerks and never had any sort of hero worship for any of the prophets though I did think David O McKay looked like he'd make a great grandfather with that hair and face.  I didn't have to let go of any ideas that JS or BY were perfect or even nice individuals, in fact quite the opposite, took a lot for me to begin to admire them as individuals at all and it has always taken time for me to warm up to any of the men who were prophets during my lifetime, possibly because that side of me that is quite an introvert.

 

Sorry if it doesn't work for you, can't really do anything about that.

[Calm]

Can our Scriptures be written by someone who did that which was objectively disgusting in the eyes of God?

I'd add "who didn't repent".

 

I kind of think God was both frustrated and disgusted (if a perfect being who knows us so intimately can be frustrated and disgusted, perhaps it was simply great sorrow at the harm we do ourselves and others) by how some of his prophets acted at times in their lives, but allowed them to grow under his guidance like others of his children.

[3DOP]

I'd add "who didn't repent".

 

I kind of think God was both frustrated and disgusted (if a perfect being who knows us so intimately can be frustrated and disgusted, perhaps it was simply great sorrow at the harm we do ourselves and others) by how some of his prophets acted at times in their lives, but allowed them to grow under his guidance like others of his children.

 

You got it cal. Thanks. David repented of his murder and adultery. He did not need to repent of polygamy. Thanks. Yes!

Edited October 26, 2014 by 3DOP

[Ares]

I couldn't care less what you think about it. It was a disgusting practice, despite the "doctrinal" justifications.

If you have nothing of substance to add don't post insults.

[canard78]

"I couldn't care less what you think about it. It was a disgusting practice, despite the "doctrinal" justifications."

 

If you have nothing of substance to add don't post insults.

 

At least he said "I couldn't care less..." instead of the infuriating american tendency to say "I could care less..." (which, for anyone who cares, is simply wrong). If you're going to be insulting, you might as well do it with correct grammar.

[bcuzbcuz]

Not for everyone.  I believe that it was restored by God to man.  It was a commandment and is an eternal law.

But then, the idea of it has never bothered me.  Perhaps if it bothered me I would try to make it illegitimate too.

Was polygamy wrong? Answer # 1: Yes Answer # 2: No

Both answers are correct.

[Alan]

At least he said "I couldn't care less..." instead of the infuriating american tendency to say "I could care less..." (which, for anyone who cares, is simply wrong). If you're going to be insulting, you might as well do it with correct grammar.

 

Well said.