Timing of Practicing Polygamy

[CV75]

8 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

@Sunday21 The United Order was a good example from your point of view embracing all Mormon teachings.  But from my point of view, someone wanting to understand how Mormonism makes sense in relation to the Bible, I remain skeptical when the only other relevant examples lie within the Mormon church

Some examples: The establishment of everlasting statutes, priesthood, covenants, etc. under the law of Moses and their replacement with those of the Gospel. The retraction of the offerings of the sons of Levi and their anticipated restoration. The retraction of the priesthood and its restoration.

As far as plural marriage is concerned, it is debatable whether plural marriage is "indeed a true eternal doctrine to be embraced by those worthy and willing at a later time." Where do you get this idea expressed in LDS canon?

[clbent04]

@Just_A_Guy Great response. I like your rewording of my question.

36 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

The *real* questions here, and the ones I think you're driving at, are whether God would explicitly tell us that He plans for some of us, someday, to be doing something that we aren't doing now; and whether He would let us take a stab at living a higher standard knowing ab initio that we would fail.

And I'm still left wondering why God would ever reveal the principle of Polygamy to Joseph Smith in the first place. Some say it served it's purpose for the time being, that it helped spur the growth of the Church's population considering the shortage of men at the time; but how much difference did practicing polygamy for that short time really make in relation to the Church's membership today?  I don't buy that answer.  

 

[Vort]

3 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

And I'm still left wondering why God would ever reveal the principle of Polygamy to Joseph Smith in the first place.

The Lord makes that clear in Section 132.

[Just_A_Guy]

17 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

@Just_A_Guy Great response. I like your rewording of my question.

And I'm still left wondering why God would ever reveal the principle of Polygamy to Joseph Smith in the first place. Some say it served it's purpose for the time being, that it helped spur the growth of the Church's population considering the shortage of men at the time; but how much difference did practicing polygamy for that short time really make in relation to the Church's membership today?  I don't buy that answer.  

These are, of course, going to entail highly speculative and subjective answers once we go beyond the bare text of D&C 132, as @Vort suggests.  The FAIR article @Sunday21 linked to offers some interesting demographic perspectives in terms of marriage efficiency rates and so on.  It has also been suggested that it created a broad network of marriages and in-law relationships that improved church cohesiveness at a critical time.  

I think, too, that just the notion that it's out there, somewhere, keeps us from getting too complacent about our own spiritual development.  What does the way I think about polygamy, tell me about the way I think about women and marriage and child rearing?  What does it tell me about the way I view love, and fidelity, and communication, and psychological security, and trust, and work, and willingness to share material possessions?

I don't aspire to live polygamy.  But I do aspire to the set of qualities that it must take to be a member of a polygamous household that isn't a complete disaster.  And when I see the chaotic family relationships of even early LDS leaders whom I consider to be uniquely great men, it reminds me how very far I have to go.

Edited August 5, 2017 by Just_A_Guy

[SilentOne]

5 hours ago, clbent04 said:

@zil the Law of Moses was built upon with a higher law, correct? this is not the same as introducing an eternally true principle and then restricting the practicing of it until further notice

I believe the example @zilhas been trying to give this whole time is that Moses went up the mountain and received a law. He came down the mountain and found that the Israelites had built an idol. He broke the tablets, went up the mountain, and received the ten commandments - a lower law than he had been given before.

[Sunday21]

In addition to the example of Moses and the Ten Commandments, was the lesser priesthood, the  Aaronic priesthood insistituted at this time as well? Or had the Aaronic priesthood existed along with the higher priesthood prior to this point?

Edited August 7, 2017 by Sunday21

[Snigmorder]

On 8/4/2017 at 11:12 PM, clbent04 said:

Why would God introduce Mormons to the practice of polygamy only to restrict it

It's better to obey the law of the land than have His fledgling church scattered by federal troops.

[JohnsonJones]

I, on the otherhand, think the example of marriage to be just about perfect in regards to Vort's comments and the idea of polygamy.

Originally, marriage was to be permanent.  You got married and stayed married.  The only reason for divorce was if one of the spouses committed adultery (as in the BIG A, not some other sundry sin along that line).

AS the Lord remarked, this was not so in the Mosaic law.  Instead, men were allowed to divorce their wives for just about anything as long as they gave their wives a paper of divorce.  This was done because of the weakness of men.  Men were so weak that they would not abide by the Lord's law, therefore a lesser version was given to them to live.

Today, that law where marriage is to be permanent is STILL the law of the Lord, but we do not hold to it.  Even in the LDS church, we see couples getting divorced left and right.  To further aggravate this, to be remarried for eternity or sealed, one doesn't necessarily have to have had a spouse that committed adultery.  All manner of reasons for divorce are accepted and those individuals can be remarried in the temple for time and eternity.

This is obviously made because even today, members of the church are not strong enough (as a whole, individuals in many cases obviously are) to live the higher law.  Therefore, we are given a lesser standard to live by.

The same was with Polygamy.  Even without the crushing weight of the US and the desires of Utah to become a state, many were not living the law of polygamy as it was meant to be.  Divorce was actually larger than Brigham Young would have liked, and thus I suppose the same was true with those who came after.  Nevertheless, they granted divorce easily, in most cases.  Polygamy was seen as more of a curse in many instances, or at other times, done with the wrong purposes in mind.  Hence, as Vort stated, I think the reason it was withdrawn was the same reason we as a church are not held strictly to the higher law of marriage today in other ways (only divorce in the case of adultery).  We, as a people are too weak for it.

In Woodruff's case, it was more circumstantial and in some ways beneficial.  By making the manifesto, as the people weren't really living with it as intended, he could help Utah's desired status to become a State in the United States of America. 

That said, I think even without that situation of coincidence, polygamy would have had a strong stance against it by the time of Joseph F. Smith, and his measures to eradicate it from the church would have been the same and completed in the same way, even without the first manifesto or the push for Statehood for Utah.

A similar situation could be seen today.  Years ago the LDS general authorities crafted a specific and unique program designed to help the Young Men in the US become stronger in the faith and better prepare them for life as young adults.  They worked with scouts to get this specially tailored program.  They called the Varsity scouts.  This was inspired by General Authorities and made specifically for the LDS young men. 

However, very few actually did as the General Authorities taught or wrote.  Instead, they were content with them getting Eagle Scouts, which meant for many, by the age of 13, they were done with the young men's program and really didn't have much else to guide them with.  Years later, the General Authorities realized that that Saints had NO intention of following them in this counsel.  Hence, they withdrew from the program. 

Many Saints misinterpreted this that the Church was withdrawing from Scouts, but it isn't so (at least not yet).  Instead, it was because the program was ineffective, and the Saints were not living up to the standards they were taught.  So, the blessings and the program was withdrawn. 

We see this continually.  When the things the Apostles teach are not obeyed, listened to, or adhered to, those teachings many times are withdrawn and lesser commandments or teachings are given out instead.  We miss out on the blessings of the other teachings, and instead receive the blessings of the lesser commandments. 

Edited August 10, 2017 by JohnsonJones

[Grunt]

On the note of polygamy, doesn't the BoM state unequivocally that taking multiple wives is bad?  How could polygamy have been accepted at all, then?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

On the note of polygamy, doesn't the BoM state unequivocally that taking multiple wives is bad?  How could polygamy have been accepted at all, then?

Yes, with a condition.

Quote

30 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.

It is important to note that while most people focus on the "raise up seed", the emphasis should be "unto me".  That helps understand the historical background.

At the time of the pioneers, there were non-Mormons who were of marriageable age around Utah.  But many Mormon women would not marry outside the faith.  Within the faith, there was an imbalance of men to women.  So, many women married one man within the faith.  After a couple generations of this, the numbers evened out and the practice was discontinued.

It may seem like it was primarily outside forces that stopped the practice, and that believe isn't entirely incorrect.  But it wasn't the only thing.  Most of the time, the Lord has his timing for multiple reasons.  In this case:

1) Outside forces.
2) The Saints weren't really living this law of plural marriage correctly anyway.
3) The practical reason for the male/female ratio evening out.

My Opinion: While most will point to item #1 above for the reason for discontinuance (and even #2) the fact is that there were outside forces from the very start.  And the Church leaders even went into hiding because of outside forces.  But the Lord's own timing, not the demands of earthly powers, dictated that once the numbers evened out, it was time to discontinue.

Edited August 10, 2017 by Guest

[SpiritDragon]

On 8/5/2017 at 2:14 PM, clbent04 said:

@Just_A_Guy Great response. I like your rewording of my question.

And I'm still left wondering why God would ever reveal the principle of Polygamy to Joseph Smith in the first place. Some say it served it's purpose for the time being, that it helped spur the growth of the Church's population considering the shortage of men at the time; but how much difference did practicing polygamy for that short time really make in relation to the Church's membership today?  I don't buy that answer.  

 

Why did God teach polygamy in the OT?

Consider for instance:

Exodus 21:10 If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.

Deuteronomy 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:

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:

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.

Why would there be rules about how to properly treat plural wives if it was simply prohibited. Clearly father Abraham practiced a form of plural marriage that appears biblically speaking to have been sanctioned from God.

Is not the very practice of OT plural marriage in and of itself an example of what you're asking?

[person0]

On 8/5/2017 at 2:25 PM, clbent04 said:

@zil the Law of Moses was never an eternally true doctrine. God did not intend for "an eye for eye" to be practiced forever.

Um, the Law of Moses is an eternally true doctrine.  In fact the Law of Moses is still in effect.  The reason we do not continue to abide the specific precepts of the Law is because it is fulfilled.  The atonement fulfilled the Law, it did not erase it.  We now live a more complete law as a result.

Quote

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (Matt. 5:17)

[Rob Osborn]

I personally do not believe the church would have survived and thrived in Utah as needed without polygammy. Almost all latter day saints alive today who have a pioneer heritage come from those polygamous marriages in early Utah times. Those generations were the cause of widespread growth in neighboring places and states that helped to stabalize and strengthen future generations and communities that would hold fast to the iron rod. I have nothing but respect for my polygamous ancestory knowing that is by far perhaps the greatest reason for why myself and so many others that live around me still hold fast to the iron rod.

[The Folk Prophet]

On 8/5/2017 at 8:04 AM, zil said:

The scriptures are full of examples of God allowing man his agency.  I submit this is no different.

God removing the choice to practice something because of others who are also trying to force others to not practice something is God allowing man his agency?

[Fether]

27 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

God removing the choice to practice something because of others who are also trying to force others to not practice something is God allowing man his agency?

Well... he isn't "removing te choice" if I wanted, I could easily become a polygamist, the FLDS community isn't too far from my home.

[The Folk Prophet]

Just now, Fether said:

Well... he isn't "removing te choice" if I wanted, I could easily become a polygamist, the FLDS community isn't too far from my home.

Fair enough. Add "righteously" to it.

God removing the choice to righteously practice something....etc....

[Sunday21]

@JohnsonJones. I wonder if the 2 year storage of food now 3 months is suggested might fit in the 'no one was doing it so...' Also relaxed standards for visiting teaching. Now a phone call will do.

[JohnsonJones]

6 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

@JohnsonJones. I wonder if the 2 year storage of food now 3 months is suggested might fit in the 'no one was doing it so...' Also relaxed standards for visiting teaching. Now a phone call will do.

It could be. 

I wasn't aware that a phone call would do for visiting teaching these days. 

I suppose now I know, and knowing is half the battle.

[Sunday21]

7 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

It could be. 

I wasn't aware that a phone call would do for visiting teaching these days. 

I suppose now I know, and knowing is half the battle.

I have heard people say that a Facebook comment is also good. I have had texts from my visiting teacher.