Plural Marriage

[LionHeart]

In light of a recent posting I read, I have been inclined to begin this topic.

There seems to be alot of controversy on this subject so I ask everyone else their opinion: Was the principle of plural marriage from man, or God? If from God, why is it not observed? If the United States made it legal, would the Church re-adopt the practice?

[Setheus]

I cant even handle Sugarbay....how on earth would I begin to cope with multiple wives?!?

[Guest sugarbay]

I'd have cha B) rge of the whip.

[BenRaines]

I believe that if it was made legal by US Govt. then we would have to wait and see what the Lord says through his prophet.

As I recall the membership doesn't have a vote. Also those asked to live the law were asked by the prophet. Not something that we volunteer for, as far as I know.

I do know that there are a lot of worthy sisters that need worthy husbands and there is a lack of worthy husbands.

[Fiannan]

Islamic perspective:

Let's now tackle the important question of polygamy. Polygamy is a very ancient practice found in many human societies. The Bible didn't condemn polygamy. To the contrary, the Old Testament and Rabbinic writings frequently attest to the legality of polygamy. King Solomon is said to have had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3) Also, king David is said to have had many wives and concubines (2 Samuel 5:13).

The Old Testament does have some injunctions on how to distribute the property of a man among his sons from different wives (Deut. 22:7). The only restriction on polygamy is a ban on taking a wife's sister as a rival wife (Leviticus 18:18).

The Talmud advices a maximum of four wives [12]. European Jews continued to practice polygamy until the sixteenth century. Oriental Jews regularly practised polygamy until they arrived in Israel where it is forbidden under civil law. However, under religious law which overrides civil law in such cases, it is permissible [13].

What about the New Testament? According to Father Eugene Hillman in his insightful book 'Polygamy reconsidered'," No where in the New Testament is there any explicit commandment that marriage should be monogamous or any explicit commandment forbidding polygamy" [14].Moreover, Jesus hasn't spoken against polygamy though it was practiced by the Jews of his society. Father Hillman stressed the fact that the church in Rome banned polygamy in order to conform to the Greco-Roman culture (which prescribed only one legal wife while tolerating concubinage and prostitution). He cited St. Augustine, "Now indeed in our time, and in keeping with Roman custom, it is no longer allowed to take another wife" [15].

African churches and African christians often remind their European brothers that the Church's ban on polygamy is a cultural tradition and not an authentic Christian injunction.

The Quran, too, allowed polygamy, but not without restrictions:

"If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with them, then only one" (4:3).

The Quran, contrary to the Bible, limited the maximum number of wives to four under the strict condition of treating the wives equally and justly.

It should not be understood that the Quran is exhorting the believers to practice polygamy, or that polygamy is considered as an ideal. In other words, the Quran has "tolerated" or "allowed" polygamy, and no more, but why? Why is polygamy permissible or allowed? The answer is simple, there are places and times in which there are compelling reasons for polygamy. Islam as a universal religion suitable for all places and all times couldn't ignore these compelling reasons.

 

In most human societies, females outnumber males.

1. In the U.S. there are, at least, eight million more women than men.

2. In a country like Guinea there are 122 females for every 100 males.

3. In Tanzania, there are 95.1 males per 100 females [16].

What should a society do towards such unbalanced sex ratios?

http://www.themodernreligion.com/women/w_c...rison_full2.htm

Very interesting and intelligent perspective on polygamy.

[Jason]

Originally posted by BenRaines@Dec 17 2005, 08:05 AM

As I recall the membership doesn't have a vote.  Also those asked to live the law were asked by the prophet.  Not something that we volunteer for, as far as I know.

Interesting thinking here Ben. The problem with this is that it's actually a myth. All LDS men were requested to take a Plural Wife. While it's true that some were specifically requested by the First Presidency, all exhorted to do so from the pulpit.

When LDS leaders today exclaim that only 3% of LDS men ever practiced plural marriage, what they're really revealing is the lack of obedience by Latter-day Saints with regards to their prophets and apostles.

I do know that there are a lot of worthy sisters that need worthy husbands and there is a lack of worthy husbands.

According to LDS doctrine, true. But the real question is would you marry a sister who was temporally married already? That's where the troubles really began in Nauvoo.

[pushka]

I'm pleased to see that the Islamic view is to treat each wife equally and justly, I've heard that mentioned here in the UK once or twice, polygamy is against the Law here, of course.

From a female perspective, other than the need to balance out the ratio of men:women, the law of Polygamy ought to be less sex discriminatory, giving females the right to have more than one husband if they so choose, however as the Bible was written, I assume, by men, to suit men's needs, then this would never happen! LOL

Erm, was God a man or a woman, since we're also debating the issue of being made in his? image, both Man and Woman...teehee

[Jason]

A few more quotes from LDS Apostle Orson Pratt on this subject:

Now, after having said so much in relation to the reason why we practice polygamy, I want to say a few words in regard to the revelation on polygamy.  God has told us Latter-day Saints that we shall be condemned if we do not enter into that principle; and yet I have heard now and then (I am very glad to say that only a few such instances have come under my notice,) a brother or a sister say, ‘I am a Latter-day Saint, but I do not believe in polygamy.’  Oh, what an absurd expression!  What an absurd idea!  A person might as well say, ‘I am a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, but I do not believe in him.’  One is just as consistent as the other. . . . If the doctrine of polygamy, as revealed to the Latter-day Saints, is not true, I would not give a fig for all your other revelations that came through Joseph Smith the Prophet. . . . Now I want to prophecy a little.  It is not very often that I prophecy, though I was commanded to do so, when I was a boy.  I want to prophecy that all men and women who oppose the revelation which God has given in relation to polygamy will find themselves in darkness; the Spirit of God will withdraw from them from the very moment of their opposition to that principle, until they will finally go down to hell and be damned, if they do not repent. (Apostle Orson Pratt, JD 17:214-216)

. . . if plurality of marriage is not true, or in other words, if a man has no divine right to marry two wives or more in this world, then marriage for eternity is not true, and your faith is all vain, and all the sealing ordinances and powers, pertaining to marriages for eternity are vain, worthless, good for nothing, for as sure as one is true the other also must be true. Amen (Apostle Orson Pratt, JD 21:296)

[Palerider]

WOW..........could you imagine the amount of Mother in Laws a guy would have.....WOW.......no wonder they stopped.....LOL!!!!!!!!!

[Justlooking]

Just one to a customer:

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

also Jesus words:

Mar 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. 7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

[Fiannan]

Matthew 25:1-13

"Then the kingdom of heaven shall be likened to ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom.  Now five of them were wise, and five were foolish.  Those who were foolish took their lamps and took no oil with them,  but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.  But while the bridegroom was delayed, they all slumbered and slept.  And at midnight a cry was heard: 'Behold, the bridegroom is coming; go out to meet him!' Then all those virgins arose and trimmed their lamps.  And the foolish said to the wise, 'Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.'  But the wise answered, saying, 'No, lest there should not be enough for us and you; but go rather to those who sell, and buy for yourselves.'  And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding; and the door was shut.  Afterward the other virgins came also, saying, 'Lord, Lord, open to us!'  But he answered and said, 'Assuredly, I say to you, I do not know you.'  Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming."

So...?

[Fiannan]

Deuteronomy 21: 15-17

21:15

If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated:

21:16

Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn:

21:17

But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his.

"And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things."

2 Samuel 12:8.

So, uh...who blessed David with his WIVES?

[eleigh1977]

Jason, thanks for mentioning that fact. I think a lot of LDS people use the 'choice' factor to give themselves comfort. Many women HATED polygamy, most were merely teenage girls who had no idea of what it would truly entail once they were married. Emma was a very strong opponent of it. I, like her, would have thrown women out of my house. She denied Joseph had any other wife her entire life, because she made sure there wasn't. It is a HUGE myth that women had the choice to tell their husbands no they didn't want to go into a polygamous relationship. IF the husband did...the wife had no choice. It's that simple. (now I realize this probably wasn't the case for every single polygamous relationship.....but certainly a great part of them.)

It is why BY and Emma could not stand each other. I think Oliver Cowdery left the church over it, for me it's the only logical explanation, since he was such a good and intelligent man. He came back, granted....but the reason he left has never really been talked about among the members.

Now I do believe JS was a prophet. I am not sure however, that Polygamy was truly meant for this life. I don't know if it was a mistake in 'revelation' or not, since JS had all ready married a couple women before the official proclomation. There was a lot of denial going on for a while.

I don't know how much it had to do w/ spiritual wivery though...I don't know if JS was 'married' in the sense...but it was taught that women who were sealed to men higher up in the church, calling wise would get into the CK. This could explain why women all ready hitched were sealed to Prophets and apostles. Again...it's something I have been studying for a good three years...because it's fascinating.

Interesting stuff...that is rarely talked about. :-)

Yes, even knowing this I still believe in the path and journey of the church....

If you want to see how Polygamy works....just take a look at the modern day practices of it....it is nothing but oppressive and I don't think it could work in this life, ever. I don't know if it was ever to have supposed to have been.

Don't worry I am working out my own opinions...I don't hate JS or any other prophet...I just seek to understand this idea.

[Snow]

Originally posted by eleigh1977@Dec 18 2005, 09:19 AM

Jason, thanks for mentioning that fact. I think a lot of LDS people use the 'choice' factor to give themselves comfort. Many women HATED polygamy, most were merely teenage girls who had no idea of what it would truly entail once they were married. Emma was a very strong opponent of it. I, like her, would have thrown women out of my house. She denied Joseph had any other wife her entire life, because she made sure there wasn't.  It is a HUGE myth that women had the choice to tell their husbands no they didn't want to go into a polygamous relationship. IF the husband did...the wife had no choice. It's that simple. (now I realize this probably wasn't the case for every single polygamous relationship.....but certainly a great part of them.)

It is why BY and Emma could not stand each other.  I think Oliver Cowdery left the church over it, for me it's the only logical explanation, since he was such a good and intelligent man. He came back, granted....but the reason he left has never really been talked about among the members.

Now I do believe JS was a prophet. I am not sure however, that Polygamy was truly meant for this life. I don't know if it was a mistake in 'revelation' or not, since JS had all ready married a couple women before the official proclomation. There was a lot of denial going on for a while.

I don't know how much it had to do w/ spiritual wivery though...I don't know if JS was 'married' in the sense...but it was taught that women who were sealed to men higher up in the church, calling wise would get into the CK.  This could explain why women all ready hitched were sealed to Prophets and apostles. Again...it's something I have been studying for a good three years...because it's fascinating.

Interesting stuff...that is rarely talked about. :-)

Yes, even knowing this I still believe in the path and journey of the church....

If you want to see how Polygamy works....just take a look at the modern day practices of it....it is nothing but oppressive and I don't think it could work in this life, ever. I don't know if it was ever to have supposed to have been.

Don't worry I am working out my own opinions...I don't hate JS or any other prophet...I just seek to understand this idea.

←

eleigh,

I just want to clarify what you are saying. You seemed to say:

1. Emma denied that JS practiced plural marriage her entire life.

2, Emma made sure that JS did not practice plural marriage.

3. It is possible that JS practiced spirital wifery.

4. JS may have married a couple plural wives/

It that correct?

[LionHeart]

Orson Pratt was commisioned by Brigham Young to make a document on how to properly live polygamy. The result of this was "Orson Pratts 27 Rules of Celestial Marriaage". When one reads this, he realizes that if these rules were followed in such a family, it would make a very happy family. I don't necessarily agree with the belief that it is oppressive for women bacause, back when the U.S. Government was trying to suppress the practice, one of their tactics was to give the women a vote in the matter; assuming that they would vote it out considering their oppression. However, although many non-Mormon women voted against it, very few, if any, Mormon women voted against it.

Another woman decided to open a refuge house, funded by the federal government, to take in all of the "opressed women" and grant them refuge from the "tyrannical practice", however, only a few women ever took refuge there; none of which were Mormon. All of them were from the local whore houses established by the anti-Mormons living in the valley. In light of this, the government shut it down.

I'm just trying to understand where the animosity towards the practice comes from. Again, most people will say that it's because it is oppressive to the women however, I disagree. I think it would all depend on the man and the type of person he is. As we can see, there are many monogomist relationships that would most certainly be labeled "oppressive and wrong". One of them has been talked about on this site.

And don't get me wrong, I'm not a polygamist; I'm not even married, however I have been personally acquainted with some modern polygamists, and in most cases, unlike the media would have you believe, the women told me that they wouldn't have it any other way; and they seem to be very happy people. Any cases that were otherwise were bacause the man was power hungry; in which case he would have problems in a monogomist relationship as well.

I did hear of one case when the man walked out on the wives because he couldn't take it anymore. Like Setheus said earlier, he has his hands full with just one.

[Guest sugarbay]

Seeing as I

don't play well with others", if my husband came home and said we were having another wife in the house, A)he wouldn't very quickly find himself without the necessary equipment it takes to procreate and B0 he would be relegated to a chain in the yard with whatever other dirty dog I might own at the time. Now, if there were more than one husband....lol B)

[Guest funkyfool416]

Yo...why is it all about the men having more than one wife? What if i wanted like 20 husbands? huh? what then..?

[glindakc]

lol funkyfool. that made me laugh.

i hate how polygamy is the mormon stereotype.

and even when somebody has like 6 siblings, there's always some snide comment like "o they must b mormon"

that relle gets me TO'd.

[Palerider]

...doesn't matter whether its more than one husband or more than one wife......listen......its about all the Mothers in Law you would have....WOW!!!!!!!

Thats enough to talk anyone out of it................LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Guest bizabra]

Originally posted by sugarbay@Dec 18 2005, 03:04 PM

Seeing as I

don't play well with others", if my husband came home and said we were having another wife in the house, A)he wouldn't very quickly find himself without the necessary equipment  it takes to procreate and B0 he would be relegated to a chain in the yard with whatever other dirty dog I might own at the time.  Now, if there were more than one husband....lol B)

←

BIZ: WOW! Pretty hostile reactoin there, dontcha think? ME? I'd just leave and NOT do anything violent or ugly. If a man didn't want just ME, then he wouldn't be worth wasting my time on. Just leave.

Physcially hurting other people is just wrong. No matter how much they have emotionally hurt you, the best thing is to just walk away. Taking out your anger physically or needing to get some sort of revenge is evil.

[glindakc]

dude. she was kidding.

[Fiannan]

If a man didn't want just ME, then he wouldn't be worth wasting my time on.

You seem to confirm Freud's view that our marriage relationship is merely a projection of needs created when we were 4-6 years of age. Your husband therefore represents your father (and one would assume at the age of 4 you want everything for yourself).

Perhaps the people who CAN and WISH to practice plural marriage are not as attached to that particular stage of life and can progress. To be able to live in such an environment requires a spirit not focused on the self and focused more on the community you have created.

Also, bizabra, you list your religion as humanist. I would then assume that you must leave all issues of "morality" and what is "right and wrong" up to the individual. So you must have no problems with polygamy being allowed as an option for those wishing to participate in it.

[Guest sugarbay]

Glindakc, thanks for springing to my defense! LOL. Then I thought,"Am I kidding?" Pfft. I know not! I do know that I don't want to shre. I think it's hysterical that he responded like that! Must be a little sensitive to be chained in the yard and de-equipmentized.. That made my day! LOL LOL B)

[Jason]

Originally posted by sugarbay@Dec 19 2005, 01:25 PM

Glindakc, thanks for springing to my defense! LOL.  Then I thought,"Am I kidding?" Pfft. I know not!  I do know that I don't want to shre. I think it's hysterical that he responded like that!  Must be a little sensitive to be chained in the yard and de-equipmentized..  That made my day! LOL LOL  B)

←

He is a She.

[Guest sugarbay]

Originally posted by Jason+Dec 19 2005, 01:49 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-sugarbay@Dec 19 2005, 01:25 PM

Glindakc, thanks for springing to my defense! LOL.  Then I thought,"Am I kidding?" Pfft. I know not!  I do know that I don't want to shre. I think it's hysterical that he responded like that!  Must be a little sensitive to be chained in the yard and de-equipmentized..  That made my day! LOL LOL  B)

←

He is a She.

←

Whoops! Hit me with that blaster, Han.

B)