Was Polygamy A Church Mistake?

[teddyaware]

You can place me in the "it was a mistake" camp, though I honor those who followed their hearts and the prophet in practicing it.  I believe it will be counted unto them for righteousness.  I happen to be a descendant of a polygamist.

If it was a mistake, that puts the Latter-day Saints in a strange and untenable position: A putative canonized revelation from God, included in the Standard Works, that's false. So either the Church is in an untenable position or you are. Do you believe there are other revelations in the Standard Works that are also in error. If so, I would be interested to know what those other erroneous revelations happen to be. 

Edited October 22, 2014 by teddyaware

[rockpond]

This would be hard to defend since an angel appeared to Joseph Smith and commanded him to get on with polygamy. It seems that if it were a mistake the mistake would have come from heaven. Unless of course Joseph was lying about the angel. And if so, then the logical result would be that the church was not true. It becomes a matter of faith that the practice came from god.

 

My faith in the restoration doesn't rest upon a single event.  So a lack of belief in polygamy doesn't cause it to crumble as you suggest.

 

I'm curious though, so I can study it more, where is the best place for reading first hand Joseph's account of the "angel with the drawn sword"?

[rockpond]

If it was a mistake, that puts the Latter-day Saints in a strange and untenable position: A putative canonized revelation from God, included in the Standard Works, that's false. So either the Church is in an untenable position or you are. Do you believe there are other revelations in the Standard Works that are also in error. If so, I would be interested to know what those other erroneous revelations happen to be. 

 

I don't find fallible prophets to be a strange and untenable position.  It's the reality that we live with.

 

Section 132 is beautiful... it teaches us about the new and everlasting covenant.  I don't find it to be in error.

[Calm]

But not all details on how it was to be practiced appeared to have been given...and some that were given seem to have been ignored or seen as symbolic or applied to certain situations.

If there was a commandment but God left JS and others on their own how to work it out, mistakes may have been made even if overall it was a commandment. Wouldn't be the first time men messed up God's commands by fiddling around with them a bit too much(think of the hedge that surrounds Hebrew law to prevent the least possibility of breaking a command).

[why me]

My faith in the restoration doesn't rest upon a single event.  So a lack of belief in polygamy doesn't cause it to crumble as you suggest.

 

I'm curious though, so I can study it more, where is the best place for reading first hand Joseph's account of the "angel with the drawn sword"?

Rough Stone Rolling by Bushman pages: 437-438

 

You can go to the index and read all about polygamy in the pages of the book. I think that the problem may be in finding a first hand account from Joseph. I think that he related the event verbablly to people who needed to know. But lets hope that there is a first hand account.

 

Of course, the angel with the sword is also in the bible.

Edited October 22, 2014 by why me

[canard78]

In my opinion it will be determined by love, not by need of populating worlds (since they will have eternity to do that, one man and one woman will be able to produce billions of children even if for some strange reason it was identical to how children are produced in mortality)...

I agree. The idea that a spirit child/intelligence might need a 9-month gestation is utterly bizarre to me.

...or because of some strange spiritual genetic reason women are inherently more righteous than men (and yet our two best known examples of the perfect human are male….does anyone want to really suggest that Heavenly Mother is inherently better than Heavenly Father just because she is a woman?).

Two best? Who's the second?

[rockpond]

Rough Stone Rolling by Bushman pages: 437-438

You can go to the index and read all about polygamy in the pages of the book. I think that the problem may be in finding a first hand account from Joseph. I think that he related the event verbablly to people who needed to know. But lets hope that there is a first hand account.

Of course, the angel with the sword is also in the bible.

I haven't finished reading RSR but I'm far enough along that I have read that chapter. And yes, Bushman only references second hand accounts of the angel. He notes that Joseph never wrote his feelings about polygamy. But if someone has a first hand account, I'd love to know about it. Otherwise, I'm not gonna spend too much time dwelling on the angel and his drawn sword. I don't see that as proof that polygamy was instituted of God in this dispensation. It apparently wasn't important enough to Joseph to write it down.

[why me]

I haven't finished reading RSR but I'm far enough along that I have read that chapter. And yes, Bushman only references second hand accounts of the angel. He notes that Joseph never wrote his feelings about polygamy. But if someone has a first hand account, I'd love to know about it. Otherwise, I'm not gonna spend too much time dwelling on the angel and his drawn sword. I don't see that as proof that polygamy was instituted of God in this dispensation. It apparently wasn't important enough to Joseph to write it down.

Joseph didn't write much down at all. Thus, the problem. However, since Joseph seemed to have told more than one person about the sword and  these people have related it, so most likely he said it. He taught polygamy to a select group of people in nauvoo. And he taught it as a principle from god. So, it was that important.

[Alan]

Was polygamy a church mistake?

 

I think the answer is obvious. Yes it was.

[Calm]

I agree. The idea that a spirit child/intelligence might need a 9-month gestation is utterly bizarre to me.

Two best? Who's the second?

Christ

[Calm]

 It apparently wasn't important enough to Joseph to write it down.

There were somethings that were too important for Joseph to write down, IIRC.

 

He didn't write the 132 revelation down apparently until years after it was received, but knew it by heart.

 

Maybe if he had lived longer he would have written it down.  How many years after the First Vision did he write/dictate that?

Edited October 22, 2014 by calmoriah

[Storm Rider]

I agree. The idea that a spirit child/intelligence might need a 9-month gestation is utterly bizarre to me.

Two best? Who's the second?

 

Canard, there is much that is bizarre to me in this entire concept.  We speak about the creative process as if it is identical to the creative process here below.  We have no idea what that process looks like or what it resembles.  There are far too many unanswered questions and the speculation only creates fodder for ridicule.  

 

The things we know are quite limited - we know that a man and wife play a role, but not how.  We know that we are joint heirs with Christ, but we remain dependent upon our Father.  We know the glory we will have is His glory that he shares with us.  

 

I am fearful of going beyond that and I suspect some will argue those. 

[KevinG]

I apologize my "seal them all and let God sort it out" joke fell flat. It was supposed to be a parody of the line from Papal Inquisitor Arnaid Almeric during the Albigensian Crusade in 1209AD.

Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius. ("Kill them. For the Lord knows those that are His own.")

My serious belief is that we perform the ordinances for all contingencies, knowing that a merciful and understanding God will respect our agency and include us in a just and merciful conclusion to the matter in the eternities. And despite people's personal distaste for the principle (multiple dealings) it has been and will be one option for those offered the option to practice it as it has been throughout the history of Gods covenant people since ancient times.

Yet we will always have the agency that God blessed us with, and Christ sacrificed for us to keep. So do not fret about a home being compelled to live it.

Edited October 22, 2014 by KevinG

[omni]

What I meant was that I don't know why this person quoted me and then said something about needing a face palm. I know what one is lol.

Sorry, it was nothing personal and I wasn't trying to be cryptic...I just don't get it sometimes.

[rockpond]

Joseph didn't write much down at all. Thus, the problem. However, since Joseph seemed to have told more than one person about the sword and  these people have related it, so most likely he said it. He taught polygamy to a select group of people in nauvoo. And he taught it as a principle from god. So, it was that important.

 

 

There were somethings that were too important for Joseph to write down, IIRC.

 

He didn't write the 132 revelation down apparently until years after it was received, but knew it by heart.

 

Maybe if he had lived longer he would have written it down.  How many years after the First Vision did he write/dictate that?

 

To be clear, I wasn't trying to suggest that *polygamy* wasn't important to Joseph.  Clearly it was.  Just that he never published a first hand account of the repeated visits by the angel that were supposed to have happened over the course of seven years.  We only have second hand accounts.

 

Joseph did write down and publish many revelations during his lifetime.  But Section 132 was not one of them.  It was published and canonized long after his death.

[thesometimesaint]

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?

 

D&C 132 is still in our Scriptures.

 

Monogamy is the default position of the church except where God commands otherwise.

 

No it wasn't a mistake, but I'm just as glad that we don't  practice it in this life anymore.

[Mystery Meat]

D&C 132 is still in our Scriptures.

 

Monogamy is the default position of the church except where God commands otherwise.

 

No it wasn't a mistake, but I'm just as glad that we don't  practice it in this life anymore.

 

Short, sweet and true. I have nothing more to add to this.

[JLHPROF]

D&C 132 is still in our Scriptures.

 

Monogamy is the default position of the church except where God commands otherwise.

 

No it wasn't a mistake, but I'm just as glad that we don't  practice it in this life anymore.

 

I think your definition of "default" might need adjusting.  Polygamy has been the default practice on earth except during times of apostasy.

[Tacenda]

Polygamy is a thorny issue, the church is constantly trying to avoid the subject. Even in the New Essay it puts the teaching by the wayside. I wonder how many more members there would be if polygamy had never happened, I'd venture to say millions more perhaps.

[JLHPROF]

Polygamy is a thorny issue, the church is constantly trying to avoid the subject. Even in the New Essay it puts the teaching by the wayside. I wonder how many more members there would be if polygamy had never happened, I'd venture to say millions more perhaps.

 

More members at the expense of the restoration of all things is NOT a good tradeoff.

The prophets early and current have warned us against putting growth ahead of doctrine.

[thesometimesaint]

I think your definition of "default" might need adjusting.  Polygamy has been the default practice on earth except during times of apostasy.

 

Default still works just fine.SEE 4.

SEE de·fault  (d-fôlt)

n.

1. Failure to perform a task or fulfill an obligation, especially failure to meet a financial obligation: in default on a loan.

2. Law Failure to make a required court appearance.

3. The failure of one or more competitors or teams to participate in a contest: won the championship by default.

4.

a. Computer Science A particular setting or value for a variable that is assigned automatically by an operating system and remains in effect unless canceled or overridden by the operator: changed the default for the font in the word processing program.

b. A situation or condition that obtains in the absence of active intervention.

Edited October 22, 2014 by thesometimesaint

[rockpond]

Polygamy is a thorny issue, the church is constantly trying to avoid the subject. Even in the New Essay it puts the teaching by the wayside.

 

True... the plural marriage essay seems to be one of the least transparent & informative of the new gospel topics essays.  It simply avoids many of the issues with polygamy that seem to be triggers of faith crises among members.

[WysteriaBlue]

Principles before personalities as they say I guess....

[WysteriaBlue]

 

a. Computer Science A particular setting or value for a variable that is assigned automatically by an operating system and remains in effect unless canceled or overridden by the operator: changed the default for the font in the word processing program.

.

 

 

I think I need Him to change my default settings for sure...UGGGH!!! 

 

wb

[Storm Rider]

I realize that polygamy can be problematic for some people.  However, I have a tough time condemning it when so many of the ancient prophets and men of God practiced the same thing. Social mores are rather fluid and can change and mutate into all kinds of weird relationships that are deemed acceptable.

 

It is hard for me to become exercised over this particular issue.  I would not want to practice it for all the tea in China, but I understand how others might find it a comfortable fit for them.  Frankly, I have a tough time condemning our wayward brothers and sisters that practice it today.  

 

I live in the Middle East and it is practiced here today without any apparent argument or condemnation from those that live it.  

 

Our Puritan heritage makes must of us quite strict in what we deem acceptable and what we deem unacceptable.  God does not seem to mind one way or another when it comes to committed relationships between a man and a woman or women IF they are married.