The Calling of Polygamy, and disaster that always follows...

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

The thread on the Priesthood Ban, got turned into a discussion on polygamy, some of that was my doing. In so doing writing the  things that we said that may have confused others. So I thought it best to let the "Phristhood Ban", get their thread back. This was a thread dedicated to polygamy, can remain on track, and address it more fully. 

I will begin with a few comments and quotes, to address that even when the Lord has permitted the practice and given commandments or guidelines, few who practice it, show little self restraint. In all our Standard Works, there are stories that abound when self-restrant, and good parenting have NOT been the order of the day. 

It caused a large split within the Church, were fundamentals, live lives with dozens of wives and countless children. One man in a polygamist is now going to jail for 5 years, for having , 24 to 27 wives, and these marriages have resulted in 145 children. No man could be a Good husband, and certainly attentive father to all. If only 1/3 of those 145 are boys, they will never learn to be  a good man, an attinitive, to the rest of the 145. Also any man children in this circumstance could not carve out a 10min a day for PPI's orto just be with "Dad". This group is not the only one, many wives are neglected, barring a once a month visit. Also with the numbers it is clear that young marriage boys will be put out so that older men may marry other wives. 

One comment suggested that  "well that it was need to have more children to build the Church, and to raise up more righteous children. But as one poster pointed out, women can only bare one child a year, and that the same thing can be accomplished through monogamy. 

A note: I am not a disgruntled member, I am not an Apastate, and I am not looking for fault. I just have a the perspective of someone who for a time lived with a polygamist/ bigamist, and know first hand how dangerous this doctrine is. 

These se are my comments and questions, also included other statements that ended up in a thread of a different topic. 

[carbon dioxide]

Does disaster always follow polygamy?  Successful relationships regardless of what they constitute rarely get press because to the outsider, successful relationships are generally boring.  It is always the scandal or the bad things that get the gossip or the attention.  Polygamy no doubt is hard to live but so was the United Order.  It takes a particular person to be successful at some of these higher laws.  Perhaps the reason we don't live polygamy today is the same reason we don't live under a  United Order system.  We simply are not ready for it.

[Thinking]

10 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Perhaps the reason we don't live polygamy today is the same reason we don't live under a  United Order system.  We simply are not ready for it.

Perhaps it's because polygamy doesn't work mathematically. It naturally leads to older men selecting young girls as wives. What then happens to the young males whose potential mates have already been selected?

[strappinglad]

I think papa is speaking of this situation.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-polygamy-trial-1.4218735

I was listening to a broadcast about this today and heard an interesting concept, it was said that the men were found guilty but not convicted. Interesting, maybe a lawyer here can clarify the law.

As for the OP. , From Ether and other places we read of sons dethroning/imprisoning/executing their fathers. Were they some of the multitude of sons from polygamy ? In closed society like the one in Bountiful BC and other polygamous places, there will always be ' lost boys ' and arranged marriages. Solomon had 700 + wives , constant war probably kept the boys population down.

[carbon dioxide]

18 minutes ago, Thinking said:

Perhaps it's because polygamy doesn't work mathematically. It naturally leads to older men selecting young girls as wives. What then happens to the young males whose potential mates have already been selected?

It does not naturally have to mean that older men selecting younger women.  Lets say Bill is 25 years old.  He marries Beth who is 23.  Ten years later Bill gets a second wife named Tina. Tina is 37.  Bill now has two wives.  Beth who is 33 and Tina who is 37.  If men naturally select younger women, it has to do with some men liking younger women but that has nothing to do with polygamy.  Hugh Hefner likes younger women.  He is not a polygamist.  Math wise it is not a big deal because most people will not practice it and there is always a few more extra females running around than males.  Sure not everyone can live in a polygamist family but where is the expectation that all have to?

Edited July 26, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[Calm]

The problem is that as men age, they continue to add wives.  However there are generally equal numbers of men and women.  Since  most of the women the same age as the men have already married them (or someone older) when they were 25 to 30 (maybe some women were still single at 35 and became 2nd or third wives then), there's really nothing left of their own age group by the time the men reach 40, save perhaps some widows. Once the few widows get remarried, where is the age group the 40 and older (who are still marrying into their 70s and  80s) can look at for additional wives?  If the men who are 5, 10, 15, and 20 years younger than they are have been doing the same thing...marrying women their own age, then the only women left will be those who are 25 years younger then the 40 year old men...In other words, are 15 years old or younger.

Edited July 27, 2017 by Calm

[sjdawg]

1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

Does disaster always follow polygamy?  Successful relationships regardless of what they constitute rarely get press because to the outsider, successful relationships are generally boring.  It is always the scandal or the bad things that get the gossip or the attention.  Polygamy no doubt is hard to live but so was the United Order.  It takes a particular person to be successful at some of these higher laws.  Perhaps the reason we don't live polygamy today is the same reason we don't live under a  United Order system.  We simply are not ready for it.

I don't know if disaster always follows but I don't see it as a successful system.   In my opinion, there is absolutely no way that Brigham Young could be a successful and loving father to 56 children.  There simply isn't enough hours in the day.   Does that constitute a disaster?  I don't know but I certainly can't see it as healthy.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

Does disaster always follow polygamy?  Successful relationships regardless of what they constitute rarely get press because to the outsider, successful relationships are generally boring.  It is always the scandal or the bad things that get the gossip or the attention.  Polygamy no doubt is hard to live but so was the United Order.  It takes a particular person to be successful at some of these higher laws.  Perhaps the reason we don't live polygamy today is the same reason we don't live under a  United Order system.  We simply are not ready for it.

Good point, "scandal" may be a more appropriate word. I can only see that most families have some type of dysfunction, when it become dysfunction squared...wow! 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Thinking said:

Perhaps it's because polygamy doesn't work mathematically. It naturally leads to older men selecting young girls as wives. What then happens to the young males whose potential mates have already been selected?

In many groups they are cast out, thrown away. 

[thesometimesaint]

4 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

It does not naturally have to mean that older men selecting younger women.  Lets say Bill is 25 years old.  He marries Beth who is 23.  Ten years later Bill gets a second wife named Tina. Tina is 37.  Bill now has two wives.  Beth who is 33 and Tina who is 37.  If men naturally select younger women, it has to do with some men liking younger women but that has nothing to do with polygamy.  Hugh Hefner likes younger women.  He is not a polygamist.  Math wise it is not a big deal because most people will not practice it and there is always a few more extra females running around than males.  Sure not everyone can live in a polygamist family but where is the expectation that all have to?

The math doesn't work over a longer period of time. The reality of the situation is that more boys are born than girls. It doesn't take very long for Polygamy to run out of woman. The LDS have the expectation that all will have the opportunity for polygamy if not in this life then then next. I don't know how it will work in the next but assume God knows.

Edited July 26, 2017 by thesometimesaint

[Thinking]

11 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

It does not naturally have to mean that older men selecting younger women.  Lets say Bill is 25 years old.  He marries Beth who is 23.  Ten years later Bill gets a second wife named Tina. Tina is 37.  Bill now has two wives.  Beth who is 33 and Tina who is 37.  If men naturally select younger women, it has to do with some men liking younger women but that has nothing to do with polygamy.  Hugh Hefner likes younger women.  He is not a polygamist.  Math wise it is not a big deal because most people will not practice it and there is always a few more extra females running around than males.  Sure not everyone can live in a polygamist family but where is the expectation that all have to?

Your created anecdotal example is about a single man adding one extra wife. Polygamy is typically practiced in religious communities where it's not just one isolated man taking one extra wife. If every man had two wives, there would need to be twice as many women as men.

[hope_for_things]

Simple answer, - God doesn't command polygamy.  

[CV75]

God’s math isn’t man’s math, which I think is reflected in D&C 59 and 104, and I think these lessons can be applied to plural marriage:

“Nevertheless thy [marriage] vows shall be offered up in righteousness on all days and at all times; But remember that on this [everlasting marriage covenant] thou shalt offer thine oblations and thy sacraments unto the Most High, confessing thy sins unto thy brethren, and before the Lord. And on this [covenant thou shalt do every needful thing] with singleness of heart that thy …joy may be full. …And inasmuch as ye do these things with thanksgiving, with cheerful hearts and countenances, not with much laughter, for this is sin, but with a glad heart and a cheerful countenance—Verily I say, that inasmuch as ye do this, the fulness of the earth is yours …And it pleaseth God that he hath given all these things unto [Adam and Eve]; for unto this end were they made to be used, with judgment, not to excess, neither by extortion. And in nothing doth [Adam and Eve] offend God, or against none is his wrath kindled, save those who confess not his hand in all things, and obey not his commandments… [Therefore] learn that he who doeth the works of righteousness shall receive his reward, even peace in this world, and eternal life in the world to come.”

“It is wisdom in me; therefore, a commandment I give unto you, that ye shall organize yourselves and appoint every [Adam and Eve their] stewardship; That every [Adam and Eve] may give an account unto me of the stewardship which is appointed unto [them]. For it is expedient that I, the Lord, should make every [Adam and Eve] accountable, as a steward over earthly blessings, which I have made and prepared for my creatures. I, the Lord, stretched out the heavens, and built the earth, my very handiwork; and all things therein are mine. And it is my purpose to provide for my saints, for all things are mine. But it must needs be done in mine own way; and behold this is the way that I, the Lord, have decreed to provide for my saints, that the [lone Adam or Eve] shall be exalted, in that the [wedded Adam and Eve] are made low. For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves. Therefore, if any [Adam and Eve] shall take of the [everlasting covenant] which I have made, and impart not [their] portion, according to the [plural marriage] law of my gospel, unto the [lone], he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment.”

I don’t meant to provoke controversy, but this leaves the stewardship of marriage open to all sorts of hypothetical arrangements where no willing person is left out, even if any “Adam” or “Eve” must wait until the next life.

[thesometimesaint]

4 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Simple answer, - God doesn't command polygamy.  

CFR

[ALarson]

21 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

CFR

There have been numerous discussions on here regarding this.  There is no record of God specifically commanding someone to live polygamy (other than the claim by Joseph Smith).  The closest we have to a commandment, is the Levirate marriages that may have included living polygamy with a brother's wife.

There is also no record of polyandry ever being commanded by God,

Edited July 26, 2017 by ALarson

[hope_for_things]

12 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

CFR

Thanks ALarson for your comment.  I agree that there isn't anything in the bible that explicitly commands polygamy.  I think the D&C 132 does though.  

But my comment was that God doesn't command it, so I'm thinking we need a higher power to comment on this thread to confirm my CFR, do we know if God is a member of MDDB?  

[strappinglad]

31 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

, do we know if God is a member of MDDB?  

Not that I am aware of , but there are a few angels/agents that wield mighty power to dispense justice and mercy as they see fit.

Mock not !!!

[Gray]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

God’s math isn’t man’s math, which I think is reflected in D&C 59 and 104, and I think these lessons can be applied to plural marriage:

“Nevertheless thy [marriage] vows shall be offered up in righteousness on all days and at all times; But remember that on this [everlasting marriage covenant] thou shalt offer thine oblations and thy sacraments unto the Most High, confessing thy sins unto thy brethren, and before the Lord. And on this [covenant thou shalt do every needful thing] with singleness of heart that thy …joy may be full. …And inasmuch as ye do these things with thanksgiving, with cheerful hearts and countenances, not with much laughter, for this is sin, but with a glad heart and a cheerful countenance—Verily I say, that inasmuch as ye do this, the fulness of the earth is yours …And it pleaseth God that he hath given all these things unto [Adam and Eve]; for unto this end were they made to be used, with judgment, not to excess, neither by extortion. And in nothing doth [Adam and Eve] offend God, or against none is his wrath kindled, save those who confess not his hand in all things, and obey not his commandments… [Therefore] learn that he who doeth the works of righteousness shall receive his reward, even peace in this world, and eternal life in the world to come.”

“It is wisdom in me; therefore, a commandment I give unto you, that ye shall organize yourselves and appoint every [Adam and Eve their] stewardship; That every [Adam and Eve] may give an account unto me of the stewardship which is appointed unto [them]. For it is expedient that I, the Lord, should make every [Adam and Eve] accountable, as a steward over earthly blessings, which I have made and prepared for my creatures. I, the Lord, stretched out the heavens, and built the earth, my very handiwork; and all things therein are mine. And it is my purpose to provide for my saints, for all things are mine. But it must needs be done in mine own way; and behold this is the way that I, the Lord, have decreed to provide for my saints, that the [lone Adam or Eve] shall be exalted, in that the [wedded Adam and Eve] are made low. For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves. Therefore, if any [Adam and Eve] shall take of the [everlasting covenant] which I have made, and impart not [their] portion, according to the [plural marriage] law of my gospel, unto the [lone], he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment.”

I don’t meant to provoke controversy, but this leaves the stewardship of marriage open to all sorts of hypothetical arrangements where no willing person is left out, even if any “Adam” or “Eve” must wait until the next life.

 

There's no "God's math" vs "man's math". Math is math, and the numbers don't add up.

[Kenngo1969]

I don't think blanket statements such as that disaster always follows from polygyny are helpful.  (If you're intending to limit that criticism to polygyny as currently practiced without Divine approval, you have a better case.)  I don't condone polygyny as practiced today, and I would not condone it unless the person I sustain as Prophet, Seer, Revelator, and President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints reinstituted it.  That said, some of us (such as your humble correspondent) wouldn't be here without polygyny, and I am not a "disaster", as much cause as I might sometimes give my parents to think otherwise.  

Edited July 26, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, ALarson said:

There have been numerous discussions on here regarding this.  There is no record of God specifically commanding someone to live polygamy (other than the claim by Joseph Smith).  The closest we have to a commandment, is the Levirate marriages that may have included living polygamy with a brother's wife.

There is also no record of polyandry ever being commanded by God,

I'll vouch for this! ETA: Wait, ALarson, you will get the response that God did command it, it's in D&C 132. 

Edited July 26, 2017 by Tacenda

[ALarson]

17 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I'll vouch for this! ETA: Wait, ALarson, you will get the response that God did command it, it's in D&C 132. 

Yeah, that's why I added "other than the claim by Joseph Smith" 

[strappinglad]

All men are born equal, it's just that some are more equal than others.

All Math is math , but some math is more mathematical than others

There is the 1,2,3... basic cow counting math

There is the 1/2, 1/3, 22/7 , type of math that is used to cut up pie with.

 There is algebra which gets a bit more complex ( pardon the pun )

 There is Calculus which lets you do the infinite stuff and is kinda fun

There is linear algebra which can throw a monkey wrench into your thinking

There is rings and shells math which borders on the metaphysical

And then there is the math used to play with quantum mechanics etc. woo woo land

God's Math contains all of the above plus whatever else is needed to create stars and galaxies and critters.

 

 On a side note, I understand that 105 boys are born for every 100 girls , but within a couple of years due to biological weaknesses , the ratio is reversed and there are about 105 girls for every 100 boys.

 

[strappinglad]

I have often wondered , if the US gov't and people had looked upon polygamy with indifference , how would polygamy in the church be organized today? Would it gradually have been phased out? Would it have become more and more restricted to the General Authorities? Would it have become an expected standard for the general membership with the resulting imbalances? Would there have come a time when the Lord commanded the practice to end?

[Guest]

7 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Simple answer, - God doesn't command polygamy.  

If not, he has certainly condones it at times. When King Saul lost favor with God, David was given his wives. But herein lies the problem, dispite having many wives, he desired another man's wife, which lead him to murder. Which lead to a lost soul, a dead first son by her. Then it came to ruin when his second son by her, the most wise man or King, fell into idolatry and a complete violation of any laws of marriage. Also in the Law of Moses, men were required to take the wives of their brothers and raise up seed unto them. 

Edited July 27, 2017 by Bill "Papa" Lee

[hope_for_things]

56 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

If not, he has certainly condones it at times. When King Saul lost favor with God, David was given his wives. But herein lies the problem, dispite having many wives, he desired another man's wife, which lead him to murder. Which lead to a lost soul, a dead first son by her. Then it came to ruin when his second son by her, the most wise man or King, fell into idolatry and a complete violation of any laws of marriage. Also in the Law of Moses, men were required to take the wives of their brothers and raise up seed unto them. 

That's one interpretation, I don't believe a person has to assume God condoned the multiple wives of David.