Polygamy Is Not The Issue. The Devil Is In The Details

[Guest]

A lack of children is not rock solid evidence for lack of sex. And Tacenda already provided a few reasons why JS may not want to be having children with his polygamous wives.

Why do you insist of telling me what I know? Could it happen with 49 wives ...anything is possible, but highly unlikely. How only Emma prevalent is almost impossible, especially if you believe he had relations with the young childbearing. I know many who doubt and dislike Joseph hope for proof, but none although many have gone to great lengths to defame him. People who will never give up, the sleeper cells, and apostates who sit behind us weekly.

[Tacenda]

Why do you insist of telling me what I know? Could it happen with 49 wives ...anything is possible, but highly unlikely. How only Emma prevalent is almost impossible, especially if you believe he had relations with the young childbearing. I know many who doubt and dislike Joseph hope for proof, but none although many have gone to great lengths to defame him. People who will never give up, the sleeper cells, and apostates who sit behind us weekly.

What if you find out that JS did have relations with his polygamist wives, what then? Are you going to turn out like me, a sleeper cell or whatever that is, since it's too hard to accept. Do you believe in polygamy after this life?

Have you ever heard about the Temple Lot case? There are sworn testimonies of it happening. I think it's going to be a hard fall if you don't face facts. But hopefully you won't go down the road I have, it's a lonely one.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Tacenda

[The Nehor]

What if you find out that JS did have relations with his polygamist wives, what then? Are you going to turn out like me, a sleeper cell or whatever that is, since it's too hard to accept. You don't believe in polygamy after this earth? Have you ever heard about the Temple Lot case? There are sworn testimonies of it happening. I think it's going to be a hard fall if you don't face facts. But hopefully you won't go down the road I have, it's a lonely one.

 

I recommend my approach. I suspect he had sex with some and not with others and do not really care.

[Tacenda]

I recommend my approach. I suspect he had sex with some and not with others and do not really care.

That's been a lot of LDS apologist's approach also.

[Teancum]

The simple truth is that polygamy has been the norm on this earth for millennia.  It really only ceased twice - the Roman Empire and today's western societies.

If there were any sin or error in it I think God would have been much more outspoken as he was against other prevalent sins.  There is no more sin in polygamy in a  society than there is in monogamy.  Now if you are talking the Mormon heaven authorized version of polygamy, that God has restricted to whenever HE commands.

Lots of bad things have been then norm for thousands of years. Slavery was the norm for a conquering nation. Genocide was the norm for the triumphant nations to deal with perceived inferior traits. The bible was written by people of a culture far removed from ours. It is a poor guideline in many ways for determining truth and moral choices. Is it a sin to conquer a people and kill its men, women and children? The bible has stories where God allegedly commanded that. Would you justify such actions today the same as you do patriarchal polygamy?

God never has commanded polygamy. Cultures practiced and claimed God justified it. None ever called it a new and everlasting covenant like JS did. That was his new innovation.

[Teancum]

Exactly.  Mankind were not designed to be monogamist.  God has never declared it to be so.  Scripture never declares it to be so. And society has never really tried very hard to be so.

Pure horsepucky.

[JLHPROF]

Lots of bad things have been then norm for thousands of years. Slavery was the norm for a conquering nation. Genocide was the norm for the triumphant nations to deal with perceived inferior traits. The bible was written by people of a culture far removed from ours. It is a poor guideline in many ways for determining truth and moral choices. Is it a sin to conquer a people and kill its men, women and children? The bible has stories where God allegedly commanded that. Would you justify such actions today the same as you do patriarchal polygamy?

 

Yes.  Whatever God requires is right, just as Joseph Smith taught.

 

 

God never has commanded polygamy. Cultures practiced and claimed God justified it. None ever called it a new and everlasting covenant like JS did. That was his new innovation.

 

   That's because the New and Everlasting Covenant didn't exist.  But polygamy has been practiced under both the new and old covenant.

 

Pure horsepucky.

 

CFR - what did I say in my statement that was factually false?  That God never mandated monogamy over polygamy?  That scripture has never spoken out on behalf of monogamy and against polygamy?  That society hasn't made much effort to be monogamous in its lifestyles in recorded history?

[The Nehor]

Exactly.  Mankind were not designed to be monogamist.  God has never declared it to be so.  Scripture never declares it to be so. And society has never really tried very hard to be so.

 

You would think that if God expected polygyny to be general He would have made the X sperm at least twice as likely as the Y sperm to win the race to the egg.

[Danzo]

A lack of children is not rock solid evidence for lack of sex. And Tacenda already provided a few reasons why JS may not want to be having children with his polygamous wives.

It is strong evidence, though. When you think of it, there is no possible way to prove lack of sex.

[Calm]

Exactly.  Mankind were not designed to be monogamist.  God has never declared it to be so.  Scripture never declares it to be so. And society has never really tried very hard to be so.

 

 

You seem to be ignoring Jacob.  Why would God command his people to be monogamous and thus to do something he hadn't designed mankind to be?

 

I would hope that the Nephites after having been commanded by God according to Jacob tried hard.  Apparently the Lamanites were managing just fine begin monogamous as well iirc.

 

Is this not a mandate?

 

Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them.

 6 And now, this commandment they observe to keep; wherefore, because of this observance, in keeping this commandment, the Lord God will not destroy them, but will be merciful unto them; and one day they shall become a blessed people.

 

Edited December 12, 2014 by calmoriah

[rodheadlee]

And just what is it, exactly, that we should be fearing if we do not view Joseph´s polygamy and polyandry as enlightened and marvelous actions?

Are you married? How would your spouse appreciate you disclosing a number of partners and marriages, all during the time of being married to each other?

Yeah, I just had my 41st anniversary. How would you institute polygamy if so ordered by Jesus Christ? My wife would do her best to see and do the will of the Lord.

 

 2 For with what ^ajudgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what ^bmeasure ye mete, it shall be ^cmeasured to you again.

 

 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is ^aangry with his brother ^bwithout a cause shall be ^cin danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother,^dRaca, shall be ^ein danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

[omni]

It is strong evidence, though. When you think of it, there is no possible way to prove lack of sex.

 

If the lack of children is evidence of no sexual relations do you then apply that same standard to the women in the Temple Lot Case?  Were BY and the women involved lying.  Was JS not following the scriptural justification for polygamy of "raising up seed"? 

 

While marital relations can't be proven, I think you have to go where the evidence leads.  One of the primary purposes for marriage is to produce children.  Why the need for God to send an angel with a flaming sword to compel JS if all he was doing was getting sealed?  Why the need for secrecy if no marital relations were involved?  IMO, if one is going to take this position it only raises more questions than it answers.

[Tacenda]

Maybe there were very few that Joseph tried to live the principle with in that way. Since it was so new to him and because his loyalty to Emma was so strong.  I don't think his choices were the best. I believe Joseph really did believe the church needed restoration. And he would research different philosophies out there and polygamy was one of them.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Tacenda

[Danzo]

If the lack of children is evidence of no sexual relations do you then apply that same standard to the women in the Temple Lot Case?  Were BY and the women involved lying.  Was JS not following the scriptural justification for polygamy of "raising up seed"? 

 

While marital relations can't be proven, I think you have to go where the evidence leads.  One of the primary purposes for marriage is to produce children.  Why the need for God to send an angel with a flaming sword to compel JS if all he was doing was getting sealed?  Why the need for secrecy if no marital relations were involved?  IMO, if one is going to take this position it only raises more questions than it answers.

 

I did not say it was proof, they may or may not have had and sexual relationships,and it may have been different for each wife.  This is something that we probably will not know in this life. It would be impossible to conclusively prove a negative anyway. However, it is evidence for the argument that was being made. I think people often confuse evidence with proof.

 

I personally would think that it is compelling evidence that the sexual relationships, if they occurred, were infrequent, given Josephs (and some of his wives) proven fertility.

 

What do you think?

[JLHPROF]

You would think that if God expected polygyny to be general He would have made the X sperm at least twice as likely as the Y sperm to win the race to the egg.

 

Or maybe God is stacking the deck for some reason...

[JLHPROF]

You seem to be ignoring Jacob.  Why would God command his people to be monogamous and thus to do something he hadn't designed mankind to be?

 

I would hope that the Nephites after having been commanded by God according to Jacob tried hard.  Apparently the Lamanites were managing just fine begin monogamous as well iirc.

 

Is this not a mandate?

 

I'm not ignoring Jacob.  I am saying the following:

 

1. God has never been recorded as favoring monogamy or condemning polygamy.

2. The only times polygamy has not been acceptable in society is in a society that has had God withdraw that system of family, and it is usually due to sin or apostasy.

3. IF polygamy was not God's choice for us, there would be commandment against it clearly laid out in every dispensation that we inasmuch as we have the records (Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ/Peter, Joseph Smith).

 

There is no record of God banning polygamy as sin OR restricting man to monogamy in any of those dispensations - it was acceptable scripturally before God (as far as our records show) in the days of Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ and Joseph Smith.

If polygamy itself was a sin, don't you think God would have said so somewhere other than to a group of men who were abusing the practice as in Jacob 2?  Wouldn't it be in the Mosaic law?  Wouldn't Christ have forbidden it? 

 

No, the only time polygamy was ever taken from the earth and banned by God that we have record of in all the history of the world was in Jacob 2 where the people were called wicked and in 1890/1904 when the people wanted statehood more.  And of course the Roman Empire/Dark Ages when the pagan nation outlawed it.

 

Basically - monogamy was the supreme family order on the earth when:

1. The earth was in apostasy

2. The pagans were running the show

3. The people were too wicked or rejected polygamy and forfeited the blessings

 

Polygamy has NEVER been recorded as:

1. Taken away from the righteous

2. Revoked as an eternal principle

3. Forbidden by commandment except when revoked for sin/apostasy

 

It is absolute blindness to call polygamy the "incident" and monogamy the "norm".  The truth is the reverse.

[bcuzbcuz]

Yeah, I just had my 41st anniversary. How would you institute polygamy if so ordered by Jesus Christ? My wife would do her best to see and do the will of the Lord.

 

 2 For with what ^ajudgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what ^bmeasure ye mete, it shall be ^cmeasured to you again.

 

 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is ^aangry with his brother ^bwithout a cause shall be ^cin danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother,^dRaca, shall be ^ein danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Thank you for your answer. I appreciate your comments, although my wife would find it impossible to accept my having a multitude of other women sharing my bed....especially without her prior acceptance, which in itself would be impossible.

I don´t have a problem with being judged according to the same judgment I give to others. A fear of a harsh judgemment has never stopped me from viewing the transgressions of others. I was a teacher and school administrator for almost 40 years. I was extremely happy to bring an abuser´s carrier to end by exposing his deeds to the law. Being afraid to say it like it is because one´s own shortcomings will come to light is only cowardice..

I feel for the anguish Emma Smith had to face because of Joseph´s polygamy and polyandry. Nothing can convince me that Joseph´s actions were "approved".

[Calm]

"The only times polygamy has not been acceptable in society is in a society that has had God withdraw that system of family, and it is usually due to sin or apostasy."

That seems to be contrary to the way Jacob describes it, that polygamy is only condoned by God when he commands it, not when he says nothing about it. Monogamy would appear to be the default command and God must actively promote polygamy in the cases he wishes it to exist.

"For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things."

In Jacob 3, iirc the Lamanites are promised to be saved because of all the other things they have forgotten and have sinned against, they are still monogamists.

Edited December 12, 2014 by calmoriah

[JLHPROF]

"The only times polygamy has not been acceptable in society is in a society that has had God withdraw that system of family, and it is usually due to sin or apostasy."

That seems to be contrary to the way Jacob describes it, that polygamy is only condoned by God when he commands it, not when he says nothing about it. Monogamy would appear to be the default command and God must actively promote polygamy in the cases he wishes it to exist.

"For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things."

In Jacob 3, iirc the Lamanites are promised to be saved because of all the other things they have forgotten and have sinned against, they are still monogamists.

 

But God also says to those in Jacob 2 when withdrawing the allowance for plural marriage:

 

Vs. 23 & 24 refer not as usually supposed to plural marriage, but to men like David and Solomon who took hundreds and thousands of wives and concubines - who as Deut warns against "multiply wives unto themselves" for power and prestige.

 

As a result you end up with

 

31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.

32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.

33 For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.

34 And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.

 

Which commandments did Lehi have?  The law of Moses, which both allowed for polygamy  (Exodus 21) but forbade multiplying of excess wives (Deut 17).

 

Jacob 2 does NOT forbid polygamy when practiced righteously (Exodus 21) but rather is a revocation of polygamy from among a prideful and wicked people (Deut 17).

How do we know this - from the examples of David and Solomon that are given who violated Deut 17 and from vs 31-33 which explains some of how they were violating the law.  And that led to vs 26-27 - the revocation of permission.

Fortunately we are in a new dispensation and permission was restored to Joseph Smith, and as long as the people live righteously and follow Gods law, that eternal law would not be revoked.  And then the people wanted statehood...

 

When the law was lived by righteous societies (Exodus 21) God never commanded against it.  Notice no such commandment was laid down in Ether against the Jaredites who were also polygamists (the Brother of Jared especially) a couple of centuries earlier, but were righteous.

 

Once again - the scriptures validate my point.  When men and society are righteous God either allows or directly commands polygamy.  When men and society are corrupt, pagan, worldly, or the like, God revokes polygamy.  Since the scriptures are the records of people of God (mostly) we have polygamists all throughout them.  Polygamy is part of righteousness, not an incident or a temporary test.  Monogamy is the fallback position when the people can't handle polygamy.

[bcuzbcuz]

The simple truth is that polygamy has been the norm on this earth for millennia.  It really only ceased twice - the Roman Empire and today's western societies.

If there were any sin or error in it I think God would have been much more outspoken as he was against other prevalent sins.  There is no more sin in polygamy in a  society than there is in monogamy.  Now if you are talking the Mormon heaven authorized version of polygamy, that God has restricted to whenever HE commands.

You couldn´t be more wrong. Show me one single society that has found polygamy the norm. Or better yet, gather yourself a bunch of wives and show me how well it functions. I´d love to hear a truthful response from youur many wives how much they enjoy living in a polygamous world. Show by example.

[JLHPROF]

You couldn´t be more wrong. Show me one single society that has found polygamy the norm. Or better yet, gather yourself a bunch of wives and show me how well it functions. I´d love to hear a truthful response from youur many wives how much they enjoy living in a polygamous world. Show by example.

 

I'm afraid that the facts are on my side (even if the feelings might be on yours).

A quick google tells me that:

 

1. 85% of societies have allowed for polygamy

 

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/367/1589/657.long

"The anthropological record indicates that approximately 85 per cent of human societies have permitted men to have more than one wife (polygynous marriage), and both empirical and evolutionary considerations suggest that large absolute differences in wealth should favour more polygynous marriages."

 

2. The Roman Empire were the instigators of the ban that trickled down through the middle ages until Joseph Smith

 

St. Augustine "On The Good of Marriage" Chapter 7 - "For it is in a man’s power to put away a wife that is barren, and marry one of whom to have children. And yet it is not allowed; and now indeed in our times, and after the usage of Rome (nostris quidem iam temporibus ac more Romano), neither to marry in addition, so as to have more than one wife living."

 

3. God seems to like working with polygamists

Scripturally God's chosen people (Abraham, House of Israel, Restored Church) and the vast majority of his prophets (Moses, Abraham, Jacob, The Brother of Jared, and in my own belief, Christ) were polygamist.  There is ZERO evidence that God ever disapproved of a good man living polygamy.  (Wicked men who were selfish, greedy, mistreated their wives etc, sure, but righteous men were permitted).

 

and as for my wife...well, her grandfather was a polygamist and we have studied the doctrine and the history and have both decided that while it would be hard, if it were ever to be restored we would not object to practicing the law of God.

[Tacenda]

I'm afraid that the facts are on my side (even if the feelings might be on yours).

A quick google tells me that:

 

1. 85% of societies have allowed for polygamy

 

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/367/1589/657.long

"The anthropological record indicates that approximately 85 per cent of human societies have permitted men to have more than one wife (polygynous marriage), and both empirical and evolutionary considerations suggest that large absolute differences in wealth should favour more polygynous marriages."

 

2. The Roman Empire were the instigators of the ban that trickled down through the middle ages until Joseph Smith

 

St. Augustine "On The Good of Marriage" Chapter 7 - "For it is in a man’s power to put away a wife that is barren, and marry one of whom to have children. And yet it is not allowed; and now indeed in our times, and after the usage of Rome (nostris quidem iam temporibus ac more Romano), neither to marry in addition, so as to have more than one wife living."

 

3. God seems to like working with polygamists

Scripturally God's chosen people (Abraham, House of Israel, Restored Church) and the vast majority of his prophets (Moses, Abraham, Jacob, The Brother of Jared, and in my own belief, Christ) were polygamist.  There is ZERO evidence that God ever disapproved of a good man living polygamy.  (Wicked men who were selfish, greedy, mistreated their wives etc, sure, but righteous men were permitted).

 

and as for my wife...well, her grandfather was a polygamist and we have studied the doctrine and the history and have both decided that while it would be hard, if it were ever to be restored we would not object to practicing the law of God.

http://janariess.religionnews.com/2014/12/12/mormons-hate-polygamy-thiiiiiiiiis-much/

 

According to a survey, a high percentage of LDS hate polygamy.  Which is odd since that's what our church was known for, for so long, not so much any longer.

 

Along with this article saying the same thing.  http://gordonhinckley.com/312/mormons-polygamy

 

I'm sure the FLDS didn't help our image.

Edited December 13, 2014 by Tacenda

[omni]

I did not say it was proof, they may or may not have had and sexual relationships,and it may have been different for each wife.  This is something that we probably will not know in this life. It would be impossible to conclusively prove a negative anyway. However, it is evidence for the argument that was being made. I think people often confuse evidence with proof.

 

 

 

Yes, I realized that.  You'll notice that I used the word "evidence" in my response.

 

I

personally would think that it is compelling evidence that the sexual relationships, if they occurred, were infrequent, given Josephs (and some of his wives) proven fertility.

 

What do you think?

 

 

I tend to agree.  Between Joseph's duties as President of the Church and running from angry mobs, I'd assume he didn't have a lot of  "alone time" with his plural wives.  In addition, we need to consider the fact that Joseph was the most well-known individual in Nauvoo - it would have been difficult to find privacy for him and his wives.  I believe both of these are contributing factors in the lack of progeny.  That being said I'm not sure if that makes things any better.  Does have relations only once or twice with a wife make it okay?  Does having relations with only 20 of his 33 wives make it okay?  

[JLHPROF]

http://janariess.religionnews.com/2014/12/12/mormons-hate-polygamy-thiiiiiiiiis-much/

 

According to a survey, a high percentage of LDS hate polygamy.  Which is odd since that's what our church was known for, for so long, not so much any longer.

 

As I said to BcuzBcuz: The FEELINGS are on the side of those who hate polygamy.  But religiously speaking polygamy is not sinful, temporary, or a mistake.  But there are many LDS members who hate it because it makes them feel bad.

[Guest]

I like what this article has to say about it.

 

http://rcg.org/articles/ttap.html

 

The Truth About Polygamy

by David C. Pack The Bible does not condone polygamy. It was not permitted in the Old Testament, and was, in fact, prohibited from the beginning. God’s Old Testament servants did not follow this practice. You will be surprised at the plain facts from God’s Word!

 

ETA:  I'm not joining this guy's ministry by all means, too hard to leave my heritage, if you want to call it that.  

God identifies himself with three men in all of scripture, both in the OT and the NT, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob...all polygamists. God could not approve or condone more. Again, you are showing how drawn you are to anything that shows and reflects your discontentment with the Church. Facts don't seem to matter just your opinion.