Plural marriage, the priesthood, and exaltation

[smac97]

33 minutes ago, Rain said:

@smac97 I'm wondering your thoughts are about bluebell's reply to you.  Did it help you see any better what she was trying to say?  

Yes.  Much.  I've been sick the last few days, so not much time/energy.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Chum]

4 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I've been sick the last few days, so not much time/energy.

That sucks. Rest and stay hydrated.

[CV75]

According to the CFM manual this year, the D&C contains policy as well as doctrine. Those who have the keys may alter policy. The current policy is found in the current Handbook (See Section 38, "Sealing Policies"). There are many circumstances and arrangements covered:

I was married civilly and want to be sealed to my spouse.	38.4.1.1
I am divorced from a previous spouse and want to be sealed to my current spouse.	38.4.1.2
My spouse to whom I was sealed died. To whom may I now be sealed?	38.4.1.3
I need to apply for a sealing cancellation or a sealing clearance.	38.4.1.4
I need to have a restriction against temple sealing removed.	38.4.1.5
My spouse and I were married for time only in the temple. Can we be sealed to one another?	38.4.1.6
To whom may my deceased family members be sealed?	38.4.1.7
How does divorce affect my sealing?	38.4.1.8
What are the effects of canceling a sealing?	38.4.1.9
How does resignation or withdrawal of Church membership affect my sealing?	38.4.1.10

[Rain]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  Much.  I've been sick the last few days, so not much time/energy.

Thanks,

-Smac

I'm glad it helped.  So sorry you are sick. Hope you feel better soon.

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

So you are saying if a man dies and his sealed wife marries a nonbeliever or someone she is not sealed in time to, she is committing adultery?  If not, explain where the adultery comes in please.  

Under the old law of chastity covenant any endowed man or woman would be in violation if they remarried outside the temple.

Fortunately that eternal unchangeable covenant got changed.  So members today aren't bound by it.  They'll be saved by different principles.  🤷

Edited December 17, 2021 by JLHPROF

[CV75]

1 minute ago, JLHPROF said:

Under the old law of chastity covenant any endowed man or woman would be in violation if they remarried outside the temple.

I think this is more about policy than covenant -- similar to the current allowance of divorce. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2007/04/divorce?lang=eng

"Because “of the hardness of [our] hearts,” the Lord does not currently enforce the consequences of the celestial standard. He permits divorced persons to marry again without the stain of immorality specified in the higher law." 

This ultimate consequence of breaking the celestial standard. the stain of immorality, is deemed either cleansed or present in the Final Judgement, not by the policy set in the kingdom of God on earth. The temple covenant of marriage, however the wording gets changed over time by policy or practice, remains the same celestial standard. However, as we can see, policy enforcement in and by the Church changes.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Under the old law of chastity covenant any endowed man or woman would be in violation if they remarried outside the temple.

Do you have examples of them getting called in or excommunicated for adultery?

[TheTanakas]

On 12/11/2021 at 1:09 PM, webbles said:

So it isn't saying that polygamy is required for exaltation.

The way I read it is that God is commanding polygamy.

Verse 32 - "Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved".

From verse 1 - " ...wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses,
David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and
concubines".

From what I know, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses did not have many wives and concubines.
 

[Chum]

On 12/16/2021 at 10:03 PM, CV75 said:

"Because “of the hardness of [our] hearts,” the Lord does not currently enforce the consequences of the celestial standard. He permits divorced persons to marry again without the stain of immorality specified in the higher law." 

This isn't to push back on your overall point.  I'm not inclined to tie divorce with hard hearts. I find the more common elements are spouses who are limited by their capabilities and the need to protect one's self and/or kids from those spouses.

If there are hard hearts present, it'd likely be those on the sidelines.

[juliann]

40 minutes ago, TheTanakas said:

The way I read it is that God is commanding polygamy.

Verse 32 - "Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved".

From verse 1 - " ...wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses,
David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and
concubines".

From what I know, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses did not have many wives and concubines.
 

Really? Concubines are for all practical purposes, slaves. Quite a doctrine you have there. 

[CV75]

48 minutes ago, Chum said:

This isn't to push back on your overall point.  I'm not inclined to tie divorce with hard hearts. I find the more common elements are spouses who are limited by their capabilities and the need to protect one's self and/or kids from those spouses.

If there are hard hearts present, it'd likely be those on the sidelines.

No sweat, I have no problem with pushback 😊

I think Jesus’, and by extension Elder Oaks’, reference to “the hardness of your hearts” wasn’t about the attitudes of the couples toward each other, but the lack of understanding the divine roles of gender, the proper relationship between men and women, and the covenant of marriage as God set it up in the beginning. The covenant people can carry the stain of adultery to the extent they understand this intersection of divine nature, Zion society and eternal covenant. Interestingly to me, in this post-Apostasy time of enlightenment, the Restoration’s roll-out is not so complete that as a people we understand.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, TheTanakas said:

From what I know, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses did not have many wives and concubines.
 

Jacob had 4, Abraham had at least 2 at the same time, Moses is confusing as a name is given, Zipporah, but there are two father in law names, Jethro and Reuel, both the Midianite priest…so same person different name or two people…and two tribal origins given of Midianite and Cushite.  Isaac, only Rebecca is given.

But my question is given the status of concubines (same could be applied to wives though)…unless they had sons who needed to be recorded for posterity for some reason and plenty of sons were listed without the mother’ being mentioned (see Genesis 5’s list of begats)…why would the Bible even mention them?  Even for an important woman (as far as the story line) such as Noah’s wife, there is no name given her nor their sons’ wives. 
 

 Not saying any of the four you listed had concubines if you differentiate the handmaids Hagar and Bilhah and Zilpah as wives (they are given “to wife” by their mistresses) though in Hebrew the word means woman as well as wife and many label them as concubines…just saying given status of women in the Bible I see no reason to assume concubines would be listed if the men had some.  If a woman did not contribute to the story being told, would she be in the Bible, concubine or wife?

Edited December 18, 2021 by Calm

[california boy]

On 12/16/2021 at 7:03 PM, CV75 said:

I think this is more about policy than covenant -- similar to the current allowance of divorce. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2007/04/divorce?lang=eng

"Because “of the hardness of [our] hearts,” the Lord does not currently enforce the consequences of the celestial standard. He permits divorced persons to marry again without the stain of immorality specified in the higher law." 

This ultimate consequence of breaking the celestial standard. the stain of immorality, is deemed either cleansed or present in the Final Judgement, not by the policy set in the kingdom of God on earth. The temple covenant of marriage, however the wording gets changed over time by policy or practice, remains the same celestial standard. However, as we can see, policy enforcement in and by the Church changes.

I am so glad the Church found a work around so that straight people didn't have to be celibate and live without hope of companionship after their spouses die.

[JLHPROF]

6 hours ago, TheTanakas said:

The way I read it is that God is commanding polygamy.

Verse 32 - "Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved".

D&C 132:28 I am the Lord thy God, and will give unto thee the law of my Holy Priesthood, as was ordained by me and my Father before the world was.
29 Abraham received all things, whatsoever he received, by revelation and commandment, by my word, saith the Lord, and hath entered into his exaltation and sitteth upon his throne.
30 Abraham received promises concerning his seed, and of the fruit of his loins—from whose loins ye are, namely, my servant Joseph—which were to continue so long as they were in the world; and as touching Abraham and his seed, out of the world they should continue; both in the world and out of the world should they continue as innumerable as the stars; or, if ye were to count the sand upon the seashore ye could not number them.
31 This promise is yours also, because ye are of Abraham, and the promise was made unto Abraham; and by this law is the continuation of the works of my Father, wherein he glorifieth himself.
32 Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved.
33 But if ye enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my Father, which he made unto Abraham.
34 God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises.

 

It all depends if you read this as referring to one law or multiple.

But either way it's been revoked for now.  So:

D&C 58:32 I command and men obey not; I revoke and they receive not the blessing

[Peacefully]

8 hours ago, california boy said:

I am so glad the Church found a work around so that straight people didn't have to be celibate and live without hope of companionship after their spouses die.

That occurred to me, too, after reading CV75’s explanation. And it’s not just if a spouse dies, it is also fairly easy to be divorced and remarried even in the temple. I’ve been through both a death and a divorce. So why can’t we just apply the “hardness of hearts” to same-sex couples and be done with it?

[Tacenda]

21 hours ago, Calm said:

Jacob had 4, Abraham had at least 2 at the same time, Moses is confusing as a name is given, Zipporah, but there are two father in law names, Jethro and Reuel, both the Midianite priest…so same person different name or two people…and two tribal origins given of Midianite and Cushite.  Isaac, only Rebecca is given.

But my question is given the status of concubines (same could be applied to wives though)…unless they had sons who needed to be recorded for posterity for some reason and plenty of sons were listed without the mother’ being mentioned (see Genesis 5’s list of begats)…why would the Bible even mention them?  Even for an important woman (as far as the story line) such as Noah’s wife, there is no name given her nor their sons’ wives. 
 

 Not saying any of the four you listed had concubines if you differentiate the handmaids Hagar and Bilhah and Zilpah as wives (they are given “to wife” by their mistresses) though in Hebrew the word means woman as well as wife and many label them as concubines…just saying given status of women in the Bible I see no reason to assume concubines would be listed if the men had some.  If a woman did not contribute to the story being told, would she be in the Bible, concubine or wife?

I'm slow on the get go, most of the time. So in reading what you've put here, I get the idea there wasn't really much polygamy as much as there were concubine relationships. Therefore, JS and the other leaders appear to have concubines mostly. And now this makes me ask myself, is there a lot of progeny from these concubine relationships in the Bible? Or what became of these women, and were they slaves as well. So many things I don't know. But kinda sickens me.

ETA: I took the question to google and an answer from Quora popped up that makes me think polygamy or concubinage shouldn't have been started.
"In Deuteronomy, kings were warned not to gather multiple wives and vast riches for themselves, because it would turn their hearts away from God.

In short, God grants people free will, even when the results can be disasterous."

ETA: To @JLHPROF Maybe god is wishy-washy? I use the small "g", because I will not accept a God that will hurt women intentionally. Here's this article that believes it wasn't condoned by God, big "G". https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/qa-archives/question/does-god-approve-of-polygamy/  

But to each their own. If you have anything to dispell my thought process, I'm all ears. 

Edited December 19, 2021 by Tacenda

[The Nehor]

21 hours ago, juliann said:

Really? Concubines are for all practical purposes, slaves. Quite a doctrine you have there. 

Sometimes. The word “concubine” refers to a lot of different kinds of relationships. It is probably worth noting that “wife” can also fit that sad description depending on culture.

 

[CV75]

19 hours ago, california boy said:

I am so glad the Church found a work around so that straight people didn't have to be celibate and live without hope of companionship after their spouses die.

I'm happy that you are glad, but these policies are for anyone's situation, irrespective of the sexuality of the individuals involved. I think your real concern is that it addresses the covenant of marriage (recognized as a divine institution), not same-sex marriage (acknowledged as a social institution). The covenant of marriage follows the pattern established from before the foundation of the world along with the Atonement of Christ for the redemption of all God's children, wherein Christ the Savior would be born in the Meridian of Time to accomplish this work, of a covenant relationship between a Man (His Father) and a woman (Mary, His mother). Adam and Eve and their descendants  reflect this same pattern, though we see not always with the divine keys employed. But the covenant is between a man and a woman, not between heterosexuals.

Edited December 19, 2021 by CV75

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

 an answer from Quora popped up that makes me think polygamy or concubinage shouldn't have been started.

"In Deuteronomy, kings were warned not to gather multiple wives and vast riches for themselves, because it would turn their hearts away from God.

In short, God grants people free will, even when the results can be disasterous."

Talk about taking things out of context.

[TheTanakas]

23 hours ago, Calm said:

Jacob had 4, Abraham had at least 2 at the same time, Moses is confusing as a name is given, Zipporah, but there are two father in law names, Jethro and Reuel, both the Midianite priest…so same person different name or two people…and two tribal origins given of Midianite and Cushite.  Isaac, only Rebecca is given.

So 4 and 2 are considered many?

[TheTanakas]

On 12/18/2021 at 1:38 PM, juliann said:

Really? Concubines are for all practical purposes, slaves. Quite a doctrine you have there. 

Let's proceed with your line of reasoning. What many wives and slaves then did Abraham, Isaac,
Jacob, and Moses have?

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I get the idea there wasn't really much polygamy as much as there were concubine relationships.

I couldn’t say. The translations typically say wife, but whether because they were legally wives, treated like wives, or assumed to be wives by translators I am not in a position to judge. A woman being labeled a concubine vs a wife in this discussion is a legal distinction about the rights of the woman in regard to her husband.

But whatever went on as described in the Bible was not that analogous legally imo to modern polygamy, so even if they were often legally concubines and not wives in the Bible, that does not imply imo that Joseph and others had concubines.  Biblical rights varied.  Modern sealing ceremonies for plural wives were identical to the sealing ceremonies for monogamous ones. At least ritually, in modern polygyny all are wives and all equal.
 

How they were treated varied though according to many journals. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, TheTanakas said:

So 4 and 2 are considered many?

I assume the “many” applies to the group of women known as their wives. 

However as a side note, I believe it was Ben Spackman who mentioned that Jewish interpretation of “multiplying wives” means over four, iirc based on Jacob/Israel being judged as a righteous man by God, but it has been a long time since I read the discussion so I may be getting that wrong.  So in that sense you would be correct. If I have inclination today I will try and find any discussion he has on the phrase. 

Edited December 19, 2021 by Calm

[JustAnAustralian]

1 hour ago, TheTanakas said:

So 4 and 2 are considered many?

Depends on the counting system a language has https://numberwarrior.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/is-one-two-many-a-myth/

[california boy]

7 hours ago, CV75 said:

I'm happy that you are glad, but these policies are for anyone's situation, irrespective of the sexuality of the individuals involved. I think your real concern is that it addresses the covenant of marriage (recognized as a divine institution), not same-sex marriage (acknowledged as a social institution). The covenant of marriage follows the pattern established from before the foundation of the world along with the Atonement of Christ for the redemption of all God's children, wherein Christ the Savior would be born in the Meridian of Time to accomplish this work, of a covenant relationship between a Man (His Father) and a woman (Mary, His mother). Adam and Eve and their descendants  reflect this same pattern, though we see not always with the divine keys employed. But the covenant is between a man and a woman, not between heterosexuals.

Well I didn't say anything about gay marriage.  I said it is nice to be straight and church leaders have  figured  out a work around that seems to go against scripture.