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

[ALarson]

5 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Which, according to Jacob, is the only legitimate reason for plural marriage.

Yet, Joseph had no children that we know of from living polygamy.  Many members even now still believe he did not have relations with any of his plural wives.  I find that interesting if it is the only justifiable reason for God to command someone to live polygamy.  

Do you have an opinion on what Joseph's relationships were with his plural wives?

I tend to believe he had marital relations with most of them....but not all of them.

Edited July 27, 2017 by ALarson

[Kenngo1969]

29 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Thank you. I'm persuaded that plural marriage was not a mistake, not an anomaly, not a haven for libertines, nor any of the alternatives. It was commanded as described by Jacob for the purpose of quickly raising a generation to jumpstart the Restoration. It required almost impossible sacrifices and led to persecution as you say, but when the time came....perhaps the government taking the steps to destroy the Church precipitated the end....it ended having completed its purpose.

When I read the accounts of BY's sons, their missions and assignments all over the world and the beautiful letters he wrote them, I see the spreading of his influence in ways that would not have been possible otherwise. I see the sacrifices made by those men and women and feel deep respect for what they accomplished in so short a time with such limited resources and under such difficult circumstances.

Like you, I salute their willingness to continue in the face of destruction and agree that they probably gave a huge sigh of relief when the burden was lifted. I don't know that I could do what they did. Their reward will be great. I see no reason to apologize for the practice, as some want the Church to do.

Eh, wot?  You don't think the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should apologize for my existence?  That's just crazy talk, Hermano Bernardo.  

[Guest]

21 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

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

"He gave", David, Saul's wives...a fact born out in scripture. God's own chosen people are the Children of Israel; Jacob's children. God throughout scripture calls himself the, "God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob", all polygamist. It may seem unpleasant, but undeniable. As much as I dislike the practice, it is condoned and allowed when God allows. I am just thankful, the only ones who practice in the Western world, are criminals. 

[Calm]

24 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Yet somehow, mirabile dictu, it all worked out in the end.

If you call a high divorce rate working out, sure.

[ALarson]

28 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Yet somehow, mirabile dictu, it all worked out in the end.

Maybe for some, but not for many others involved.  So to say that it "all" worked out in the end, that is not true.  

And, it is still causing problems for the church today.

[Jeanne]

57 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Which, according to Jacob, is the only legitimate reason for plural marriage.

So..where are all of Joseph's children after over 30 wives?

[hope_for_things]

3 hours ago, pogi said:

The 12 tribes of Israel come from 4 different wives.  Was that not condoned...the people of God?  

I don't think God is in the business of condoning an inherently unequal marriage practice.  

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Jeanne said:

So..where are all of Joseph's children after over 30 wives?

I tend to think Joseph saw the issue somewhat differently. Joseph (though he was sealed to many women) only had children through Emma Smith, his first wife. 

[hope_for_things]

2 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

"He gave", David, Saul's wives...a fact born out in scripture. God's own chosen people are the Children of Israel; Jacob's children. God throughout scripture calls himself the, "God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob", all polygamist. It may seem unpleasant, but undeniable. As much as I dislike the practice, it is condoned and allowed when God allows. I am just thankful, the only ones who practice in the Western world, are criminals. 

God didn't write the words you're reading in scripture.  Humans wrote scriptures, often to justify their political and socioeconomic world views.  

That said even if you believe the authors of the text were inspired in every single world written and transcribed many times over, a person can still interpret those Hebrew bible passages differently.  

As Mormons with the idea that the Bible is flawed as part of our doctrine, I'm surprised you're interpretation isn't more open minded.   

Edited July 28, 2017 by hope_for_things

[Guest]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

God didn't write the words you're reading in scripture.  Humans wrote scriptures, often to justify their political and socioeconomic world views.  

That said even if you believe the authors of the text were inspired in every single world written and transcribed many times over, a person can still interpret those Hebrew bible passages differently.  

As Mormons with the idea that the Bible is flawed as part of our doctrine, I'm surprised you're interpretation isn't more open minded.   

Here we go again, when you have Prophet Nathan, spell it out to King David, you will get a clear picture. If you are saying no scripture is any good because it is flawed. Then to what source are we it too, where do we draw the line, or Even better, which books of scripture are we omit? 

[hope_for_things]

10 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

Here we go again, when you have Prophet Nathan, spell it out to King David, you will get a clear picture. If you are saying no scripture is any good because it is flawed. Then to what source are we it too, where do we draw the line, or Even better, which books of scripture are we omit? 

These are good questions to ask and the start of moving away scriptural literalism and modern prooftexting.  Some really good advice on this recent podcast episode.  

http://www.ldsperspectives.com/2017/07/19/genre-bible/

[clarkgoble]

4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

It was commanded as described by Jacob for the purpose of quickly raising a generation to jumpstart the Restoration. It required almost impossible sacrifices and led to persecution as you say, but when the time came....perhaps the government taking the steps to destroy the Church precipitated the end....it ended having completed its purpose.

Well I'm not sure it's purpose was to quickly raise a generation. As others have noted the birthrate under polygamy was lower than monogamy. Now if you would say one of its purposes was to create a huge rift between the church and society such that we were isolated and able to develop on our own I might be more sympathetic. Not that I'd say that was its only purpose. It is interesting that shortly after the end of polygamy we have new instructions creating differences between Mormons and society with the Word of Wisdom. My personal guess is that while that separation was a major component the other component was to introduce it as a way of dealing with life after death and relationships. Although one might well ask about polyandry which Brigham Young did not seem happy with at all.

[clarkgoble]

2 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

These are good questions to ask and the start of moving away scriptural literalism and modern prooftexting.  Some really good advice on this recent podcast episode.  

http://www.ldsperspectives.com/2017/07/19/genre-bible/

One needn't be a literalist to note God treated the twelve tribes of Israel specially and that those arose out of polygamy. There's of course a lot of middle ground between strict "literalist" and treating the whole thing as purely human written. 

My sense, again perhaps wrong, is that the "raise up seed" in Jacob 2 was Jacob conceding the role of polygamy in the history of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob but saying those were special cases. i.e. I'm skeptical raise up seed meant "have lots of offspring." More interesting is how Jacob doesn't engage with the levirate law which may indicate the Nephites didn't have those commands.

 

[RevTestament]

Temporal polygamy as a plan for exaltation does not agree with sec 132. Further, it would be impossible for everyone to get exalted no matter how righteous they are because there aren't enough women. Lastly, there is a good chance someone put a few words in JS' mouth. Nevertheless, the more virgins take hold of the bridegroom, the better the result, and the bigger his government.

[carbon dioxide]

On 7/26/2017 at 0:34 AM, sjdawg said:

I don't know if disaster always follows but I don't see it as a successful system. 

Anything can be taken to excess but monogamy is not that successful either.  Plenty of bad stories in homes with one wife and divorce is pretty common in monogamy. 

[carbon dioxide]

On 7/26/2017 at 11:51 AM, hope_for_things said:

Simple answer, - God doesn't command polygamy.  

God would disagree with that.

[carbon dioxide]

14 hours ago, ALarson said:

I believe that all Prophets are fallible, past and present.  I have my own relationship with God, my own inspiration and the feeling of the spirit when I know something is right.  I personally believe that polygamy came from man and not from God, that it was wrong and it is still a thorn in the side of even the current church as we continue to lose active members when they learn the details regarding how Joseph and others lived it.

 

That may not be the problem with polygamy but the Church doing a horrible job explaining polygamy and a lot of other issues that it tends to avoid.  When members don't get a good foundation on the scriptures when it relates to polygamy, avoids discussing issues of polygamy in the 19th century church, it should be no surprise that a number of them have problems when they hear a negative slant on it.  The Church does little to nothing to address it and pretty much has given up the narrative on this and other issues to those outside the Church.  It is easy to declare that polygamy did not come from God when the membership has spent virtually no time studying the scriptures that show yes it did come from God.  I don't think this will change anytime soon.  I still believe there is a view that if one avoids a problem or a difficult issue, the issues just go away.  I have never seen evidence that they actually do.

Edited July 28, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[carbon dioxide]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

I don't think God is in the business of condoning an inherently unequal marriage practice.  

Perhaps God does not see it that way.  I have never seen any indication that "equality" is really high on the list for God.  The fact that God will give one man 10 talents, another man 5 talents and another man just one talent is evidence to me that God is not focused on equality.

Edited July 28, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[Bernard Gui]

26 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Well I'm not sure it's purpose was to quickly raise a generation. As others have noted the birthrate under polygamy was lower than monogamy. Now if you would say one of its purposes was to create a huge rift between the church and society such that we were isolated and able to develop on our own I might be more sympathetic. Not that I'd say that was its only purpose. It is interesting that shortly after the end of polygamy we have new instructions creating differences between Mormons and society with the Word of Wisdom. My personal guess is that while that separation was a major component the other component was to introduce it as a way of dealing with life after death and relationships. Although one might well ask about polyandry which Brigham Young did not seem happy with at all.

Maybe the purpose was not to create more babies, but to "raise seed to the Lord." Jacob was never cited as motivation or justification, but the episode surely fits his parameters. I wonder if they were even aware of Jacob's instructions. 

What do you believe Jacob meant when he said if the Lord wanted "raise seed unto the Lord" he would command his people. I know of no real-life occurrence since Jacob spoke. It's curious that he said that if was never to be implemented.

 I believe it was to create a core of faithful strong members that would solidify the Restoration. Maybe this could be proved by comparing the numbers of the generations of faithful members and leaders from polygamous families (especially the descendants of the brethren I mentioned earlier) with a similar number of descendants of contemporary monogamous families, or the non-polygamous LDS population in general to see if there really was an impact.

There are many ways to separate from society. Polygamy seems an oddly painful way to do it. Moving to the West where none would come to hurt or make afraid seems a more obvious choice. The Amish, Mennonites, and Jehovah's Witnesses manage it quite well. The Shakers separated themselves into oblivion. Monasteries work well.

It's interesting that we have so many disparate views on polygamy.

[Bernard Gui]

5 hours ago, ALarson said:

Yet, Joseph had no children that we know of from living polygamy.  Many members even now still believe he did not have relations with any of his plural wives.  I find that interesting if it is the only justifiable reason for God to command someone to live polygamy.  

Do you have an opinion on what Joseph's relationships were with his plural wives?

I tend to believe he had marital relations with most of them....but not all of them.

Well, unless there were medical conditions we don't know about, I would expect there to be a lot of progeny. People of that era were not as open with such information. I'm reminded of the conversation between Doctor Maturin and Sir Joseph in one of Patrick O'Brian's "Master and Commander" Napoleonic era British navy novels. Sir Joseph had a certain distressing  manly problem for which he solicited the good surgeon's confidential advice. During the entire conversation, Sir Joseph never describes his problem in uncertain terms nor does the doctor give a clear and frank answer. Instead in their gentlemanly way they beat all around the bush with obscure mythological and historical stories and anecdotes. But in the end each clearly understands what the other was getting at and Sir Joseph goes his way quite satisfied and grateful for the help.

Or better stated, I don't know. Maybe there is no way to know. Maybe it's none of my business. Who knows?

Edited July 28, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[Jeanne]

11 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

I tend to think Joseph saw the issue somewhat differently. Joseph (though he was sealed to many women) only had children through Emma Smith, his first wife. 

I love you Papa...but no comment.

[pogi]

15 hours ago, ALarson said:

As far as I know, Jacob did not state that God had commanded anyone to live polygamy.  He stated that polygamy is justifiable, but only when God commands it:

Pretty strange thing for Jacob to state if God "doesn't command polygamy", he even stated (in God's voice) a specific reason for polygamy - to "raise up seed unto me", and under that condition, God states, "...I will command".  

So, I would hesitate to state that "God doesn't command polygamy", when he clearly states "I will command" under these specific conditions.  Besides stating that "I will command", I think that passage about raising up seed unto God is a pretty clear condoning of Jacob's (Israel's) polygamy, fulfilling the covenant of God to Jacob (a polygamist) that his seed "shall be as the dust of the earth" and that "in thee and thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed".  

15 hours ago, ALarson said:

Did Moses state in the Bible that he was commanded by God to live polygamy?  If so, do you have a reference/

The reference is in the law of Moses which I quoted.  I am not saying that Moses himself was polygamist (that is debatable), I am saying that via Moses, God included polygamy in the law (levirate marriage).   

Here is a good article on reading Jacob's (BoM) teachings in context of the law of Moses:

 https://www.mormoninterpreter.com/understanding-jacobs-teachings-about-plural-marriage-from-a-law-of-moses-context/

 

[ALarson]

25 minutes ago, pogi said:

Pretty strange thing for Jacob to state if God "doesn't command polygamy", he even stated (in God's voice) a specific reason for polygamy - to "raise up seed unto me", and under that condition, God states, "...I will command".  

So, I would hesitate to state that "God doesn't command polygamy", when he clearly states "I will command" under these specific conditions.  Besides stating that "I will command", I think that passage about raising up seed unto God is a pretty clear condoning of Jacob's (Israel's) polygamy, fulfilling the covenant of God to Jacob (a polygamist) that his seed "shall be as the dust of the earth" and that "in thee and thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed".  

This is still not a commandment to live polygamy.  Actually it is condemned and then it's stated that if polygamy is allowed, it is "to raise up seed unto me" which Joseph apparently did not do.  Also, studies have shown that there are less children born within a polygamous society, not more, and there's no evidence that children are more righteous or faithful (if you want to interpret it that way) within polygamous families.

So no, Jacob does not state that God has commanded anyone to live polygamy.

25 minutes ago, pogi said:

The reference is in the law of Moses which I quoted.  I am not saying that Moses himself was polygamist (that is debatable), I am saying that via Moses, God included polygamy in the law (levirate marriage).   

Here is a good article on reading Jacob's (BoM) teachings in context of the law of Moses:

Levirate marriages include a commandment for a brother to marry and care for his dead brother's wife, not a specific commandment to live polygamy.  These marriages may include polygamy (if the living brother already has a wife), so it's evidence that God does allow polygamy under certain circumstances.  But there's no direct commandment to live polygamy here.  Also, this is not how Joseph practiced polygamy (other than when he married Don Carlos's widow).

There is also no commandment to live polyandry and a great many of Joseph's marriages were polyandrous (and some of Brigham's were too).

Edited July 28, 2017 by ALarson

[thesometimesaint]

Hyrum Smith certainly did.

[Kenngo1969]

Whatever else is or is not debatable about polygyny (high birthrates compared to monogamy, lower birthrates compared to monogamy, why God commanded it [if, indeed, he did so]) I find it revealing that its opponents completely fail to deal with the elephant in the room; the silence is deafening ("No, no, no, I'm not saying you shouldn't exist! Honest!  I simply think that polygyny is an abomination, that it could never have been commanded by God, that those who obeyed the purported command were dupes of Joseph" and so on and so forth). "It's not the effect [the existence of real-life, honest-to-goodness, flesh-and-blood human beings] that I have a problem with; it's just the cause [polygyny]."

But there is no effect without a cause.  Opponents of polygyny seem to want people to forget that and/or they want to have their cake and to eat it, too.  Again, the failure to connect those dots is telling, and the silence is deafening.