Gray Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Name one previous prophet to Joseph Smith that specifically condemned plural marriage. (And don't say Jacob, that has been explained a hundred times as being withdrawn due to wickedness, not because plural marriage was wrong). I have read zero prophetic bans on plural marriage as a practice. Joseph was contradicting nobody. I would argue that Jesus condemned it indirectly when he condemned divorce and remarriage as adultery. It could only be adultery if the first marriage was still considered binding despite the divorce. In which case, Jesus was teaching that being married to two people at once was equivalent to adultery. I know that's not a direct condemnation of polygamy, but I can't make the math work any other way with that teaching.
HappyJackWagon Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 "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). "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). And yes, Jacob. If your argument is that God is simply commenting on the specific practice of an individual at a particular time and not the entire practice, I think we could make similar arguments for just about any other practice.
JLHPROF Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 "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)."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).And yes, Jacob. If your argument is that God is simply commenting on the specific practice of an individual at a particular time and not the entire practice, I think we could make similar arguments for just about any other practice. #1 refers to abuse of the practice, not the practice itself or else the Levirate marriages and Exodus 21:10 makes no sense. #2 is not a limit of number but a minimum requirement. (Now you're using the old evangelical false interpretations?) #3 Jacob refers specifically to the abuse of wives under plural marriage, not to the practice itself. I have explained this verse by verse on several occasions.
HappyJackWagon Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 #1 refers to abuse of the practice, not the practice itself or else the Levirate marriages and Exodus 21:10 makes no sense. #2 is not a limit of number but a minimum requirement. (Now you're using the old evangelical false interpretations?) #3 Jacob refers specifically to the abuse of wives under plural marriage, not to the practice itself. I have explained this verse by verse on several occasions. 1- Why do you interpret this as an abuse of polygamy instead of polygamy in general? 2- How do you know it is a minimum requirement and not a limit? 3- I haven't seen your explanations of Jacob before. Do you have a link? These sound like trite excuses BUT I'm interested to see how I may be wrong in my thinking about this.
JLHPROF Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 (edited) These sound like trite excuses BUT I'm interested to see how I may be wrong in my thinking about this. I'm not convinced you are but: 1- Why do you interpret this as an abuse of polygamy instead of polygamy in general? I already told you that it couldn't be an outright ban or else the Levirate marriage laws and Exodus 21:10 wouldn't allow for it.Additionally, both Jacob 2 and D&C 132 reference Solomon as a bad example for violating this law, but there is no mention of the more famous polygamists like Abraham and Jacob in this. Your reference specifically says "Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away". That's the Solomon sin - I Kings 11:4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father.So your first reference is NOT a ban on polygamy, but on abuse of polygamy in the manner of Solomon. 2- How do you know it is a minimum requirement and not a limit? By reading -- A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,- Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. These just don't read like restrictions, but I have no way of proving that to you. Every other condition in the same verses are something that is needed, a requirement. Why would number of wives be a restriction when these verses aren't listing restrictions. But you're right, we don't KNOW. 3- I haven't seen your explanations of Jacob before. Do you have a link? OneTwo Edited April 20, 2015 by JLHPROF 1
Recommended Posts