Why Did Polygamy Need To Be Restored When Not Previously Commanded?

[carbon dioxide]

 

 You don't really mean to say you don't understand how adding wives to a relationship would hinder all other relationships? 

 

Mark 10:6 “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ 7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

 

So if I add a second or third child to my family, that will hinder the relationship to my first child?

 

All I will say is that Genesis 2:24 was not making monogamy the ideal in anyway.  And I believe Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and others will back me up on that.   Remember, no polygamy, no house of Israel. 

Edited April 24, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[danielwoods]

So if I add a second or third child to my family, that will hinder the relationship to my first child?

 

All I will say is that Genesis 2:24 was not making monogamy the ideal in anyway.  And I believe Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and others will back me up on that.   Remember, no polygamy, no house of Israel. 

 

First you aren't married to your kids, so that analogy doesn't really work. The relationship is quite different. Second, even in that limited relationship more kids equals less time with each child. There's only so much time. But, that's only part of the problem with reference to marriage as I have explained. 

 

IF you don't think that monogamy was God's ideal, then what type of marriage is God's ideal in your view? 

[ALarson]

So if I add a second or third child to my family, that will hinder the relationship to my first child?

 

Sorry carbon, but that's got to be the worst argument or analogy I've seen for living polygamy!

 

If you read the histories of many of the women who suffered horribly while living polygamy in the early days of the church, it was primarily because of the new young wives their husbands were bringing home with them.  These same women loved their children and even loved the children of the other wives in many cases.  You cannot compare the romantic love of a wife and husband to the love of a Mother for her child.  Both are love, but they are very different.

Edited April 24, 2015 by ALarson

[JLHPROF]

You cannot compare the romantic love of a wife and husband to the love of a Mother for her child.  Both are love, but they are very different.

 

Totally mortal perspective.  Absolutely no evidence that the love of God we are moving towards operates that way.

[ALarson]

Totally mortal perspective.  Absolutely no evidence that the love of God we are moving towards operates that way.

Well, I have to agree with you there JLHPROF.  I think the love of God encompasses love for all.

 

However, I still believe the analogy of adding more kids to your family is the same as adding more wives is a poor one.  But maybe some can separate these emotions?  

[JLHPROF]

Well, I have to agree with you there JLHPROF.  I think the love of God encompasses love for all.

 

However, I still believe the analogy of adding more kids to your family is the same as adding more wives is a poor one.  But maybe some can separate these emotions?  

 

I think that the love (and I am talking about actual LOVE here, not attraction, not fondness, not anything other than my actual love) for my wife and children is the same.  There are other aspects to the relationship that I don't think we should rightly consider "love".

God's love for his wives is infinite.

God's love for his children is infinite.

God is love.

How do you separate those?  And we are supposed to be working on becoming like God, are we not?

[carbon dioxide]

Sorry carbon, but that's got to be the worst argument or analogy I've seen for living polygamy!

 

 

It is no worse than the claim that since Jesus is married to his Church than that teaches monogamy.  The whole analogy was not given to refute polygamy yet people like to take that and apply it to the discussion.

[carbon dioxide]

If you read the histories of many of the women who suffered horribly while living polygamy in the early days of the church, it was primarily because of the new young wives their husbands were bringing home with them.  These same women loved their children and even loved the children of the other wives in many cases.  You cannot compare the romantic love of a wife and husband to the love of a Mother for her child.  Both are love, but they are very different.

We can find many modern cases of women suffering in monogamy.  50% of all marriages in monogamy end in divorce.   Does that sound like a ringing endorsement of it?

[carbon dioxide]

First you aren't married to your kids, so that analogy doesn't really work. The relationship is quite different. Second, even in that limited relationship more kids equals less time with each child. There's only so much time. But, that's only part of the problem with reference to marriage as I have explained. 

 

IF you don't think that monogamy was God's ideal, then what type of marriage is God's ideal in your view? 

I am sealed to my kids.  My relationship with my kids is the same as with my wife except that I don't have intimate relations with them but big deal.  I would lay down my life for them just as I would my wife. 

 

I have no problem with monogamy.  As I have said, that is the rule except when God says otherwise.  My only issue is your claim that monogamy is the ideal.  Nowhere in the scriptures does it assert that monogamy is the ideal and polygamy is not.  You read that meaning into passages when those passages don't assert it.  My disagreement is simply you are going beyond what the scripture says to infer a meaning that is not intended or stated. 

Edited April 24, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[Robert F. Smith]

 .......................................................................   

 

Right. The NT only teaches monogamy. 

 

 

Clearly? The fact remains that the NT teaches monogamy. 

...................................................................................   

Interesting that Martin Luther believed that polygamy was legal in the eyes of God, while John Calvin agreed with you.  So often, in understanding biblical texts, we are led to find what we want to find, and so seldom are we guided by factual, objective exegesis.  That is why virtually all religions are cafeteria religions.  People want to hear what makes them feel good, and allows them to do what they want to do.  How convenient.

 

Prof. Martin Luther (Wittenberg Univ.): 

"I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter." (De Wette II:459)

 

Josephus, the great Jewish historian stated that “it is the ancient practice among us to have many wives at the same time.” Antiquities of the Jews, XVII,1,2 (§14). 

[danielwoods]

I am sealed to my kids.  My relationship with my kids is the same as with my wife except that I don't have intimate relations with them but big deal.  I would lay down my life for them just as I would my wife. 

 

I have no problem with monogamy.  As I have said, that is the rule except when God says otherwise.  My only issue is your claim that monogamy is the ideal.  Nowhere in the scriptures does it assert that monogamy is the ideal and polygamy is not.  You read that meaning into passages when those passages don't assert it.  My disagreement is simply you are going beyond what the scripture says to infer a meaning that is not intended or stated. 

 

I understand your doctrinal position. It isn't supported by the bible. Rather what is taught is monogamy. 

 

And in your view what is God's ideal?

 

 

 

Interesting that Martin Luther believed that polygamy was legal in the eyes of God, while John Calvin agreed with you.  So often, in understanding biblical texts, we are led to find what we want to find, and so seldom are we guided by factual, objective exegesis.  That is why virtually all religions are cafeteria religions.  People want to hear what makes them feel good, and allows them to do what they want to do.  How convenient.

 

Prof. Martin Luther (Wittenberg Univ.): 

"I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter." (De Wette II:459)

 

Josephus, the great Jewish historian stated that “it is the ancient practice among us to have many wives at the same time.” Antiquities of the Jews, XVII,1,2 (§14). 

 

Notice that even Luther didn't state that polygamy was taught in the NT. 

[JLHPROF]

Notice that even Luther didn't state that polygamy was taught in the NT. 

 

The NT is not the be all and end all of scripture.  Never was.

It's not even a complete record of the life of Christ and his teachings in the Holy Land.

Edited April 24, 2015 by JLHPROF

[danielwoods]

The NT is not the be all and end all of scripture.  Never was.

It's not even a complete record of the life of Christ and his teachings in the Holy Land.

 

Right, for the LDS this is true. 

 

What is interesting is that even though it's not a "complete record" it does contain quite a bit of information about marriage and relationships, and none of it teaches polygamy. 

[JLHPROF]

Right, for the LDS this is true. 

 

What is interesting is that even though it's not a "complete record" it does contain quite a bit of information about marriage and relationships, and none of it teaches polygamy. 

 

This should not just be an LDS thing.  There is no rational way the New Testament can be viewed as the complete word of God.  It makes no sense historically, doctrinally, or logically.

As for it teaching polygamy, it doesn't teach against it either, despite the misinterpreting of several verses.

 

As Robert already showed you, Josephus, a contemporary of the New Testament apostles, stated that  “it is the ancient practice among us to have many wives at the same time.” Antiquities of the Jews, XVII,1,2 (§14).

 

In the end, if we are being fair minded, there is as much allowance for polygamy as there is restriction against it in the NT.  Pretty much zero.  So we go with the historical record concerning practices.

We know nothing of Jesus' life from the age of 18-30ish, the age when a young man would be marrying and starting a family.  Assuming he didn't makes little sense.  You know I personally believe Christ had at least 3 wives - Mary, Martha, and Mary Magdalene.  And the only evidence I have is the recorded NT interactions he had with them.

[danielwoods]

This should not just be an LDS thing.  There is no rational way the New Testament can be viewed as the complete word of God.  It makes no sense historically, doctrinally, or logically.

As for it teaching polygamy, it doesn't teach against it either, despite the misinterpreting of several verses.

 

As Robert already showed you, Josephus, a contemporary of the New Testament apostles, stated that  “it is the ancient practice among us to have many wives at the same time.” Antiquities of the Jews, XVII,1,2 (§14).

 

In the end, if we are being fair minded, there is as much allowance for polygamy as there is restriction against it in the NT.  Pretty much zero.  So we go with the historical record concerning practices.

We know nothing of Jesus' life from the age of 18-30ish, the age when a young man would be marrying and starting a family.  Assuming he didn't makes little sense.  You know I personally believe Christ had at least 3 wives - Mary, Martha, and Mary Magdalene.  And the only evidence I have is the recorded NT interactions he had with them.

 

The question is what does the NT teach? The answer is that it teaches monogamy. 

When asked, does the NT teach polygamy? The answer is no. 

 

Your defense is that it doesn't teach against polygamy is just that. A defensive position. Such an argument can be made about a few thousand things that the NT doesn't teach against. I don't find that to be a sound approach to studying what the NT teaches, but to each his own. 

[Gray]

This should not just be an LDS thing.  There is no rational way the New Testament can be viewed as the complete word of God.  It makes no sense historically, doctrinally, or logically.

As for it teaching polygamy, it doesn't teach against it either, despite the misinterpreting of several verses.

 

As Robert already showed you, Josephus, a contemporary of the New Testament apostles, stated that  “it is the ancient practice among us to have many wives at the same time.” Antiquities of the Jews, XVII,1,2 (§14).

 

In the end, if we are being fair minded, there is as much allowance for polygamy as there is restriction against it in the NT.  Pretty much zero.  So we go with the historical record concerning practices.

We know nothing of Jesus' life from the age of 18-30ish, the age when a young man would be marrying and starting a family.  Assuming he didn't makes little sense.  You know I personally believe Christ had at least 3 wives - Mary, Martha, and Mary Magdalene.  And the only evidence I have is the recorded NT interactions he had with them.

 

Yes, the Jews did practice polygamy anciently (as did their non-Hebrew neighbors), just as Josephus said. I'm not sure of the relevance to the New Testament, though. 

[carbon dioxide]

And in your view what is God's ideal?

 

For some people it may be monogamy.  For others it may be polygamy.  There is no ideal for everyone.  The scriptures don't state there is.

[carbon dioxide]

Right, for the LDS this is true. 

 

What is interesting is that even though it's not a "complete record" it does contain quite a bit of information about marriage and relationships, and none of it teaches polygamy. 

The NT encompasses just a few decades of human history.  Most of the Bible period is Old Testament.  What we have in the NT is just a few writings of that period.  I don't even think one can prove that the NT contains even 1% of the beliefs, doctrines, practices, of Christ or the First Century church. 

[carbon dioxide]

The question is what does the NT teach? The answer is that it teaches monogamy. 

When asked, does the NT teach polygamy? The answer is no. 

 

Your defense is that it doesn't teach against polygamy is just that. A defensive position. Such an argument can be made about a few thousand things that the NT doesn't teach against. I don't find that to be a sound approach to studying what the NT teaches, but to each his own. 

The argument of silence does not disprove polygamy.  The NT does not speak against polygamy.  Not one negative statement is made against the practice.  In the LDS view it does not matter.  Polygamy is regulated by God.  There are times when God commands it and other times he does not.  If God did not command the saints in the First Century to practice it, there would not be a need to address it.  This does not mean that God might not command people in another place and time to practice it.  Fortunately for LDS we don't handcuff ourselves to the baseless view that unless a NT writer mentioned something, it does not exist or is not important.  I have personally written letters in my life.  One would be a fool to think all my views, knowledge, and deeds could be found in a handful of letters I have written.  Yet people seem to think that in the case of Paul or Peter, they wrote down EVERYTHING.

[JLHPROF]

Yes, the Jews did practice polygamy anciently (as did their non-Hebrew neighbors), just as Josephus said. I'm not sure of the relevance to the New Testament, though. 

 

Uh, because Christ and the Apostles lived in the Jewish community and we have no reason to doubt at least some of them followed Jewish custom as depicted in the NT.  Everything from Passover to visiting the Temple.  Christ taught in many parables that directly reference Jewish custom and law.

 

Everyone is looking for God to command polygamy in the Bible and screaming "A-HA!" when it is nowhere to be found.  That's a silly approach since Biblical societies already practiced polygamy.  What they should be looking for is a Biblical commandment AGAINST polygamy.  But the closest they can come is the OT restriction against too many wives (in the same law as instructions on how to live polygamy right), and a few misinterpreted NT verses that aren't referring to polygamy at all.

 

I think the onus of proof as far as Biblical polygamy is concerned is on those who believe it is forbidden, not on those who accept it as allowed.

Edited April 24, 2015 by JLHPROF

[ALarson]

For some people it may be monogamy.  For others it may be polygamy.  There is no ideal for everyone.  The scriptures don't state there is.

I cannot imagine polygamy being an eternal principle or part of any creator's plan.  It simply caused too much pain and suffering to have come from God.

 

But then, I believe that each one of us will be able to be with the ones we love (if they want to be with us too).  So, I'll be with my one and only if she'll have me.  That may not make sense to some of you, but being assigned numerous women to be my wives for eternity makes absolutely no sense to me.

 

We can go back and forth forever on this topic and not change each other's mind, and I get that.  I also know many believe polygamy is a good thing.  I do not.

Edited April 24, 2015 by ALarson

[JLHPROF]

I cannot imagine polygamy being an eternal principle or part of any creator's plan.  It simply caused too much pain and suffering to have come from God.

 

Really?  Again?  Anything that causes us pain can't be according to God's will? 

Do I need to start referencing scriptures and Church history?

 

Maybe I'll just put CFR.

 

This argument against polygamy holds no water.

Edited April 24, 2015 by JLHPROF

[ALarson]

Hey JLHPROF, I believe that your arguments FOR polygamy hold no water.  Again, we can continue back and forth, but I see no need to.

 

I do not have a literal belief in any of the scriptures.  So any instance you think you can show me where you believe that God commanded people to live a principle that caused pain and suffering would simply mean nothing to me (if there even are any other than the principle of polygamy).

 

I believe God allows things to happen that cause pain, but I absolutely do not believe he commands anyone to do something that is hurtful, degrading or that involves lying and cheating to live it. That is how I feel about polygamy.  

 

I know you have the right to believe as you do regarding polygamy, but I have a right to believe as I do.  That's all I was trying to convey in my previous post.

Edited April 24, 2015 by ALarson

[ERayR]

I cannot imagine polygamy being an eternal principle or part of any creator's plan.  It simply caused too much pain and suffering to have come from God.

 

 

This is the argument that God wouldn't do it that way because you don't like it and God just wouldn't do anything that you disapprove of.

[ALarson]

This is the argument that God wouldn't do it that way because you don't like it and God just wouldn't do anything that you disapprove of.

Not at all.  I just don't believe in a God who would command anyone to live polygamy.