Jump to content

D&C 132 Contradicts Jacob 2.


Ray Agostini

Recommended Posts

I'm raising this subject again as it came up with Jan in my thread "Has it been worth it?" I have discussed this quite extensively on ZLMB and not found satisfactory answers. It is concerning what I feel is a contradiction between D&C 132 and Jacob in the BoM.

Here are the relevant verses from the D&C, which teaches that plural marriage is a commandment.

4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

The above verse has been reinterpreted in a context of monogamy after 1890. But initially it referred to plural marriage:

6 And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fulness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.

This is what led Brigham Young and others to teach that without plural marriage a man would be damned.

The new and everlasting covenant was initially plural mariage.

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

Link to comment

Honestly,

IMO this is one ot the real sticking points against plural marriage and I have never been able to reconcile the two. I have tired and have a pat answer. But it does not convince me so I will not offer it.

I am interested in any other ideas as well.

Teancum

Link to comment

Ray, you have to understand that the BoM was written BEFORE JS took other mens wives and other wives. DC-132 is clearly an attempt by JS to cover his actions of his weaknesses and to acount for them as the will of the Lord. But as you have pointed out. They are an abomination. Isnt that plain enough for you Polygamy condoning people?

By the fruits you shall know if this thing I have said is true, ..yup..look at all the fruit the law of Polygamy has brought to the church...nothing but pain, and controversy.

Link to comment
Ray, you have to understand that the BoM was written BEFORE JS took other mens wives and other wives. DC-132 is clearly an attempt by JS to cover his actions of his weaknesses and to acount for them as the will of the Lord.

Your logic is flawed in that JS did not need to cover anything by giving D&C 132. The possiblity of the command was already in Jacob 2:30.

By the fruits you shall know if this thing I have said is true, ..yup..look at all the fruit the law of Polygamy has brought to the church...nothing but pain, and controversy.

The pain and controversy comes mostly from those (like yourself) who are not LDS.

Link to comment

Is murder an abomination?

Was not this required by the Lord of Abraham?

Was it not contrary to law?

How about Moses?

Was he not given the stone tablets.

"Thou shalt not Kill"

Then in the next breath... Though shalt kill everyone that doesnt obey the commandments?

Ex 21 + 22

:P

Also... what was it that God commanded?

"Multiply and replenish the earth"

Sarah could not bare children... so she obeyed God by giving her handmaid to Abraham. And what did God bless her with for being faithful?

A child of her own.

Doesn't sound like a blessing God would provide a sinner now does it.

Link to comment
By the fruits you shall know if this thing I have said is true, ..yup..look at all the fruit the law of Polygamy has brought to the church...nothing but pain, and controversy.

I would disagree with this statement. My polygamist ancestors would most likely disagree with this statement.

What they say in their diaries is that at times it was a heavy burden and taxed them emotionally and spiritually. However, they received a witness that the principle was true. The fruit for our family has been many spiritual, hard-working, excellent people. Maybe this would have occured without polygamy. We'll never know.

So, yes it certainly has caused the church a lot of pain over the years, but I disagree with your "...nothing but pain" statement.

Link to comment
and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law

For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.  Jacob 2:30

That's quite a difference to plural marriage being a commandment, and it says in D&C 132 that this commandment goes back to the time of Abraham.

BCSpace,

I think you forgot to "bold" the relevant part of this line in the scripture. Let me help out here:

"For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things." Jacob 2:30

Even if one believes this to be a revelation from God, and then rationalizes that this line allows polygamy, one can see that Smith himself violated it. He never used polygamy to raise seed with the women he took as wives. This always seems to be the fact that lds posters want to avoid.

Link to comment

Actually, the New and Everlasting Covenant is "Eternal Marriage". It has always been, neither monogamous or plural. Plural is simply a subgrouping of this Marriage. Yes, some leaders said this about plural marriage as well, but always from the beginning it refered to Eternal Marriage. Plural Eternal Marriages are simply another type of this Marriage.

In otherwords, your looking at the trees and not seeing the forest.

Plural Marriage was not given to all, so obviously itself is not the New and Everlasting Covenent. Eternal Marriage is that Covenant.

Link to comment

Jacob:

[24] Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

D&C 132:39

David's wives and concubines were given unto him of me...

These two things would seem to be the only contradictory statements on the surface. Everything else seems fine to me. BCSpace explained it well I think. I did some cross referencing on this and it is at least is sanctioned by the Lord with regards to David in 2 Sam 12: (Nathan is telling David what The Lord told him)

8 And I gave thee thy master
Link to comment
and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law

For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.  Jacob 2:30

That's quite a difference to plural marriage being a commandment, and it says in D&C 132 that this commandment goes back to the time of Abraham.

That's your problem right there. It is a commandment only to those to whom it is given. Hence there is no contradiction.

BC,

The revelation is given for all of those who accepted Joseph Smith as a prophet, ie, the church:

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand 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
Link to comment
Even if one believes this to be a revelation from God, and then rationalizes that this line allows polygamy, one can see that Smith himself violated it. He never used polygamy to raise seed with the women he took as wives. This always seems to be the fact that lds posters want to avoid.

Did he have a chance to?

How long did he practice poligamy before he was killed.

Link to comment
Ray, you have to understand that the BoM was written BEFORE JS took other mens wives and other wives. DC-132 is clearly an attempt by JS to cover his actions of his weaknesses and to acount for them as the will of the Lord.

Your logic is flawed in that JS did not need to cover anything by giving D&C 132. The possiblity of the command was already in Jacob 2:30.

By the fruits you shall know if this thing I have said is true, ..yup..look at all the fruit the law of Polygamy has brought to the church...nothing but pain, and controversy.

The pain and controversy comes mostly from those (like yourself) who are not LDS.

Sorry Jacob does NOT validate polygamy. Raise seed has NOTHING to do with multiple wives.

Pain??

Here is your pain:

Members aren't allowed newspapers, radio, TV or the Internet and are forbidden to speak with outsiders.

This Polygamy idea all started with on Joseph Smith. His legacy will be responible for countless finatics who belvied in his weakness.

http://www.kwtx.com/news/headlines/1382157.html

Link to comment

Did he have a chance to?

How long did he practice poligamy before he was killed.

He began teaching polygamy as early as 1831. Somewhere around 1835 we know he was involved with Fanny Algers, and this led Oliver Cowdery to condemn him and eventually leave the church. Cowdery referred to this as "that filthy, nasty affair with Fanny Algers".

Link to comment
Even if one believes this to be a revelation from God, and then rationalizes that this line allows polygamy, one can see that Smith himself violated it. He never used polygamy to raise seed with the women he took as wives. This always seems to be the fact that lds posters want to avoid.

Did he have a chance to?

How long did he practice poligamy before he was killed.

Zak,

Astute question and very reasonable to ask.

The answer is, yes. If you'll spend some time researching his family history at the lds.org site, you'll see that he had children with his wife Emma long after he began practicing polygamy with other women.

Really gets to the heart of the issue raised via the question: "What was accomplished with polygamy that could not have been accomplished with monogamy"!

Just another fact, IMO, that casts a huge shadow over the entire claim of "revelation" in 132 and Smith's actions.

Link to comment
Even if one believes this to be a revelation from God, and then rationalizes that this line allows polygamy, one can see that Smith himself violated it. He never used polygamy to raise seed with the women he took as wives. This always seems to be the fact that lds posters want to avoid.

Did he have a chance to?

How long did he practice poligamy before he was killed.

Zak,

Astute question and very reasonable to ask.

The answer is, yes. If you'll spend some time researching his family history at the lds.org site, you'll see that he had children with his wife Emma long after he began practicing polygamy with other women.

Really gets to the heart of the issue raised via the question: "What was accomplished with polygamy that could not have been accomplished with monogamy"!

Just another fact, IMO, that casts a huge shadow over the entire claim of "revelation" in 132 and Smith's actions.

There seems to be a huge disconnect with eastern and western cultures.

Link to comment
How do we know that the east is really the east?

That land bridge between russia and alaska... puts Newyork as far east as you can go on land.

Who was talking land? I was refering to east and west on the following "bar of morality":

LESS MORAL ==================================MORE MORAL

:P

Link to comment

Zak, I hope you are not going to start going into that whole Atlantis thing again :P . I'm just kidding.

Sorry Jacob does NOT validate polygamy. Raise seed has NOTHING to do with multiple wives.

Then what does it have to do with? If you consider the context, it is obvious that it is exactly what it has to do with. Consider my additions for clarity in [italics]

For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people [to practice polygamy] ; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things [by not practicing polygamy] .  Jacob 2:30

Please fill in how it should be writen, considering the context.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...