Just for the record, Mormons don’t practice polygamy. As I understand it, about 6% of Mormons back around 1880 practiced polygamy. It wasn’t widespread, and it hasn’t been practiced by Mormons for over 100 years. If you heard something on the news about Mormons practicing polygamy, either the news is mistaken and is accidentally calling someone who isn’t a Mormon a Mormon, or somebody is calling themselves a Mormon when they really aren’t. If a Mormon were caught practicing polygamy today they’d be excommunicated right away.
Ok, that said, some critics of the Mormon church try and say that parts of the Book of Mormon condemn polygamy, that therefore the LDS Church doesn’t even obey it’s own scriptures, and therefore Mormons are a bunch of sneaky monkeys who shouldn’t be trusted to manage your 401k.
For example, critics use the scriptures Jacob 1:15; 2:23,24,27,31;3:5; Mosiah 11:2,4; and Ether 10:5,7. But what do these scriptures say?
Jacob 1:15 – “And now it came to pass that the people of Nephi, under the reign of the second king, began to grow hard in their hearts, and indulge themselves somewhat in wicked practices, such as like unto David of old desiring many wives and concubines, and also Solomon, his son.”
However, this scripture doesn’t actually condemn polygamy, but rather the “desiring of many wives and concubines…” Polygamy amongst Mormons was never intended to be a “Hey, I need more sex so I’m going to get me some more wives…” type of thing. Rather, it was God commanding men to take additional wives, which in many, if not most cases, the men were quite reluctant to do. Plural marriages were an assignment, not a personal choice or privilege. I know that’s hard to believe in our current sex-crazed culture, so you can believe that or not, but it’s true.
But in addition, this single verse of scripture needs to be taken in context with the scriptures around it and the situation in which these words were being delivered. They were being spoken by Jacob, a Book of Mormon prophet, who was rebuking his own people for their wickedness in committing adultery, unlawfully marrying additional wives, and justifying it by their misunderstandings about David and Solomon. Here are some follow up verses from the prophet Jacob which are part of the same rebuke (see Jacob 2:27-30).
27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
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.
The key is verse 30. God is saying that if he wants to use polygamy to increase the population of his chosen people, then he will institute polygamy by way of commandment (with the understanding that commandments are delivered through a prophet, not directly to individuals). Otherwise, no polygamy.
Moving on, Jacob 3:5 states “Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not aforgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father-that they should have save it were bone wife, and cconcubines they should have none, and there should not be dwhoredoms committed among them.”
This verse does not condemn polygamy. It states that the Lord gave a commandment “unto our father” (Jacob’s father was Lehi) that they should not practice polygamy. Therefore it was against God’s commandment for the descendants of Lehi to practice polygamy, unless otherwise commanded as stated previously.
The same explanation can be applied to the scriptures in Mosiah. As for the verses in Ether, this is an entirely different people than the Nephites/Lamanites who were descendants of Lehi, therefore they were not subject to the same, specific commandments Lehi’s descendants were, but it can be assumed that, as in every other case we know of, polygamy was strictly forbidden unless God commands it, and that the condemnation of the practice is not a condemnation of polygamy itself, but a condemnation of practicing it incorrectly, in order to satisfy sexual desires rather than in obedience to God’s commands.
I thought I would try to correct a few mistakes in your post. Brighamites are not the only ones that lay claim to Joseph Smith’s church. Claiming that the term “Mormon” is reserved soley for Brighamites, is as silly as Protestants saying Mormon’s are not Christians. The Brighamite branch of the LDS movement does not own the term “Mormon.” Moreover, many “Mormons” from other branches of the LDS movement do claim that polygamy is a vital ordinance and so do not excommunicate members for engaging in the practice.
I would agree with the passages that are cited to condemn polygamy, do allow wiggle room for God to make exceptions. So your explaination is valid, for the Brighamite Mormons only. Other Mormons contend the command from God is still in effect.
Are you sure about that 6% participation rate in 1880? You assert that it was not widespread, but I am curious where you got your figures? Lastly, you again reassert the Brighamite Mormons have not practiced polygamy for over a hundred years, (after the 1890 manifesto?), but even your church records show that new polygamous marriages were performed decades after which makes the ban much less than a century old still.
I’m not sure why you would create a site to explain Mormons, beliefs, and misconceptions, but be so flippant with your facts and explainations.
There is a very clear difference between celestial plural marriage and multiplying wives. The latter is what God finds abhorrent, which is men seeking out women of their own initiative to have them as wives without a confirmation from God via the Lord’s Anointed. This is the evil David and Solomon did that God found objectionable, not simply that they had more than one wife. Nathan gave multiple wives and that was fine, but there were other wives taken without the Lord’s approbation through him.
That’s where the trouble started for the Nephites too. This is also where the fundamentalists of today are in serious trouble as well. Simply put, men are to have strict fidelity to Christ and not “lust after women” (for any reason). Those men who do lust after women are viewed by Christ as adulterers against Him. The penalty of such is death. The role of a man is not to exploit women for their own purposes, this is why in the sealing ordinance the man “receives” the woman. A celestial sealing is only valid in that spiritual context. If there is energy for a man to “take” then it is not in harmony with what makes a relationship eternal.
What is clear to me is at the same time plural marriage was proscribed to the Nephites, there was also strong evidence of their cursing to utter destruction accompanying it. These two are intimately intertwined as I shall talk about later. The Nephites were not handling the very sacred things in the proper spirit and were turning it into an abomination in God’s eyes. Thus, it would be worse for them to do that than to have it removed. This was a lesser of two evils thing. It is a sore cursing to have it removed, but better than continuing it in a corrupted and perverted manner. It was the same for us when we lost it.
The purpose of plural marriage is practical as well as glorifying a worthy man with many talents. When the practical side of it is taken away there is a serious problem that the society has to absorb. For example, today if a woman marries in the temple and her husband dies, the children she bears will belong to her deceased husband in the eternities and not the man who sired them. This is regardless of whether the new husband is worthy of the temple or not. The woman would have to cancel her sealing with her deceased husband in order to allow the new husband to raise up and eternal family. The inability for a man to have more than one wife makes it impossible for a man to raise up seed on behalf of a deceased brother and raise up seed for himself at the same time. Someone is going to be slighted with things the way they are now.
Now, instead of purely using the family government to provide for the welfare needs of widows and orphans, you now need some kind of a state sponsored welfare system to compensate for the vacuum. This puts into motion a premise for statism that is at odds with the political structure of the Kingdom of God, which is a republic “under God” that protects people’s unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These widows and orphans are not allowed to be legitimately received into a functional family (which would most often be a man and his wife or wives) but now you need a system of taxation to raise funds to provide welfare. This means all in the society now become enslaved under statute to bear the societal burdens. Those who oppose this are painted as “selfish and evil” but more likely they have enough vision to see far ahead to the calamity that eventually comes to this parasitic system that only meets a portion of people’s needs and uses compulsion and invasion of rights to do it.
Sadly, the government only provides the basic necessities of food, shelter, etc. and leaves other very needful aspects out, most significantly having a righteous and worthy priesthood head for counsel, guidance, etc. for her and her children. Brigham Young and other early brethren prophesied that if the saints abandoned this practice of plural marriage that the day would come when they would wake up as slaves with their daughters walking the streets of Salt Lake City as whores. This wasn’t a random flash of information they couldn’t explain. This was a simple projection born of their complete understanding of how societies work and the less than obvious consequences of putting aside God’s Laws.
I think it is no coincidence that the Utah state constitution was the vehicle that exposed the will of the Mormons about how much they wanted plural marriage to be done away with. Not to mention those who were going about it inappropriately as David and Solomon faltered. At the same time as the saints accepted statehood, they also proscribed plural marriage in their constitution, which put them on the path to statism. The only proposed constitution for statehood that had overwhelming acceptance (approx 13,000 for and 500 against) was one that made taking a plural wife a misdemeanor crime. The vast majority of saints did not want plural marriage.
This was the main reason it was taken from us. If the saints truly wanted to hold onto it the adversary would have not had the power he did. Now, as a consequence of losing the ability to keep this Celestial law and other Terrestrial laws, we are now as a church only able to receive ministration at the Telestial level, which is via the Holy Ghost only. This is why there have been no “Thus saith the Lord” oracles written ever since that time. If you want Celestial ministration, you have to abide the laws of that kingdom. Same goes for Terrestrial. Thus, we are as a church in a state of widowhood being cut off from direct revelation from the Father and the Son. See D&C 90, 101 and Rev 18.
If we ever hope to have that level of ministration again, we will need to purify ourselves to honor God’s Law and allow it to have an honorable and functional place in the society again. Until this repentance takes place, we are in the same position the Nephites were in. A constant battle between the statists who wanted to use government to give everyone what they need (seducing the people with benefits, welfare, public works, etc. like the Gadianton thieves and robbers) and those who want to maintain and uphold the liberty of the people to be sovereigns of a republic “under God” without being molested by a governmental system bent on forcing everyone to do what is “right”.
As I see it, the argument of plural marriage is directly tied to our capacity as a society to properly maintain our individual sovereignty as well as make it possible for widows and orphans to receive the full spectrum of welfare so they are not slighted either. A man does not have motivation to care for something that is not a part of his stewardship, nor should he be forced to do anything outside of his stewardship. The most appropriate way for women to be cared for is to be received as wives with the full respect and dignity being such affords them.