- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Thank you for keeping me in check Ray. I have edited the post you referenced, but I must add that I think many, many people have been hurt BADLY by polygamy, though I admit most of the documented cases have come from splinter groups who have abused it even further than we probably ever did. And then there’s this: Quote:Church leaders viewed plural marriage as a command to the Church generally, while recognizing that individuals who did not enter the practice could still stand approved of God.
Women were free to choosetheir spouses, whether to enter into a polygamous or monogamous union, or whether to marry at all. Do you guys think everyone
REALLYfelt they were free to choose? I just know that there are so many in the church (including myself until recently) who feel they really shouldn’t even turn down a church calling. I’m sorry everyone, I should probably just go meditate until I cool down. I don’t know why this is bugging me so much.
Life_Journey_of_Matt wrote:Do you guys think everyone
REALLYfelt they were free to choose? (
No.
What I’ve been wondering about recently is the idea that God commanded it, and that he has commanded it in the past. I had always been taught that polygamy was a part of restoring the full gospel. I have gone through parts of the Bible however, and do not see evidence of God having commanded it. The most obvious time for him to have done so would have been with Adam and Eve. When could having more women and quickly growing the population been more important? Also, after the flood with Noah, instead of bringing multiple wives with him, he brought his sons and their wives. Where we do see polygamy in the Bible, it seems to be the opposite of what God wanted. Abraham and Sarah were promised seed, but through their lack of faith they brought Hagar into the marriage. That went really badly. With Jacob, his father in law tricked him into marrying two women, and then the fighting of those women led to two other wives. I don’t see how God had a hand in that. Does God trick people to obey his commandments? Does he use jealousy to get his purposes fulfilled?
David and Solomon had many wives, but they were kings and not prophets. Ghangis Khan had many wives for goodness sakes. It doesn’t appear to have religious connections but is cultural or power based. I know there are many men who are mentioned as having multiple wives in the Bible, and although it doesn’t seem to be something they are punished for, I don’t think God commanded it in any of these cases. He seems to allow for people’s customs or traditions. This is mostly just in the old testament though. The new testament seems much more aimed at having one wife as the ideal.
For this reason, I don’t believe God instituted polygamy at any time.
Quote:Do you guys think everyone REALLY felt they were free to choose?
Everyone? Surely not.
Lots of women? Yes. There is documentation of women saying no to proposals, and the majority of active members never were involved. Thus, mathematically, most members absolutely were free to choose “in early Utah”.
Again, I’m not defending it by saying that – but we have to be very careful to be as accurate as possible when dealing with such a highly emotional subject.
Ann wrote:Life_Journey_of_Matt wrote:Do you guys think everyone
REALLYfelt they were free to choose? (
No.
Me either. I think if polygamy were still practiced a temple recommend question would be “Do you have a testimony of the law of polygamy and do you live it inasmuch as you have been commanded.” And I think if anyone expressed doubts about it the TR would be in jeopardy – like other things in our time. So, yes, we have our free agency and are free to choose whether to obey or disobey any commandment – with a price. Such strings do not make us totally free.
DarkJedi wrote:So, yes, we have our free agency and are free to choose whether to obey or disobey any commandment – with a price. Such strings do not make us totally free.
I guess I don’t see this as any different than any decision or choice we make about anything. Every action has consequences. The free part is that you get to make the choice but you don’t get a pass on what comes next. But total freedom? That’s an interesting concept but not something you see in the real world.
journeygirl wrote:I know there are many men who are mentioned as having multiple wives in the Bible, and although it doesn’t seem to be something they are punished for, I don’t think God commanded it in any of these cases.
Super great post journeygirl. I couldn’t agree more. I see Joseph as originally trying to get back to the primitive religion of the early saints. In his quest, Joseph latched on to a custom that was common in the time of the Partriachs. The pure concept of the restoration would be to go back to how things were before. I don’t think that it quite worked out that way but i do believe that was the idea.
I have said for a long time that I view Joseph as more of an Old Testament prophet than anything else. I also look at the totality of Mormon history so far and am fascinated by the parallels with Judeo-Christian history – on a much shorter, more condensed time frame. That, however, is a topic best approached outside this thread. Maybe someday I will write a post about it.
I think Joseph saw himself as the head of a great dynasty. Polygamy was part of that. Parts of the temple ceremonies are based on the anointings of kings. All of these point to the idea of being literally spiritual royalty. Having said that, I see polygamy as a fallen human state throughout history that served to subjugate women because they were not viewed as equals and men wanted multiple sex partners – whether Joseph or Abraham practiced it, it’s a lifestyle that harms and oppresses women and benefits men.
hawkgrrrl wrote:I think Joseph saw himself as the head of a great dynasty. Polygamy was part of that. Parts of the temple ceremonies are based on the anointings of kings. All of these point to the idea of being literally spiritual royalty.
Having said that, I see polygamy as a fallen human state throughout history that served to subjugate women because they were not viewed as equals and men wanted multiple sex partners – whether Joseph or Abraham practiced it, it’s a lifestyle that harms and oppresses women and benefits men.
Would you mind telling me/us very frankly, then, what you do to bear the church’s teaching on this?
Roy wrote:Super great post journeygirl. I couldn’t agree more. I see Joseph as originally trying to get back to the primitive religion of the early saints. In his quest, Joseph latched on to a custom that was common in the time of the Partriachs. The pure concept of the restoration would be to go back to how things were before. I don’t think that it quite worked out that way but i do believe that was the idea.
hawkgrrrl wrote:I think Joseph saw himself as the head of a great dynasty. Polygamy was part of that. Parts of the temple ceremonies are based on the anointings of kings. All of these point to the idea of being literally spiritual royalty.
I agree with that hawkgrrrl. Temple ceremonies are an interesting example of the concept of restoration combined with new elements as well. They were borrowed from Freemasons and thought to be of ancient origin. They were updated to serve the purposes of JS and the church in his day but the changes were taught as a “restoration” of the original, uncorrupted, ceremony.
This reminds me of your BCC post about retroactive continuity. We superimpose our understandings and values upon the ancients. This is furthered by our ideas on “dispensations,” “apostasy,” and “restoration.”
GBSmith wrote:DarkJedi wrote:So, yes, we have our free agency and are free to choose whether to obey or disobey any commandment – with a price. Such strings do not make us totally free.
I guess I don’t see this as any different than any decision or choice we make about anything. Every action has consequences. The free part is that you get to make the choice but you don’t get a pass on what comes next. But total freedom? That’s an interesting concept but not something you see in the real world.
I think total freedom does exist. There are man-made consequences/prices and there are church-made consequences but there are also natural consequences and sometimes no real affective consequences at all. I’m not saying that all man-made consequences are bad (people should be imprisoned for murder and child molestation among other things), but not believing in the sanctity of plural marriage should have no consequence, man-made, church-made, or otherwise.
Something not mentioned in the article was Brigham Young’s assertion that one could NOT get into the Celestial Kingdom without plural marriage. In fact, the phrase “Celestial Marriage” as found in the D&C referred to plural marriage, as a monogamous marriage was in fact not “Celestial”. But to tackle that issue, the church would have had to again disavow something BY taught over the pulpit. Twice in two weeks might be a little too much for some to handle (Ray’s Flood theory at work here)
hawkgrrrl wrote:I think Joseph saw himself as the head of a great dynasty. Polygamy was part of that. Parts of the temple ceremonies are based on the anointings of kings. All of these point to the idea of being literally spiritual royalty.
Having said that, I see polygamy as a fallen human state throughout history that served to subjugate women because they were not viewed as equals and men wanted multiple sex partners – whether Joseph or Abraham practiced it, it’s a lifestyle that harms and oppresses women and benefits men.
The assertion is that Abraham, et al were commanded to take more than one wife but I don’t recall ever reading anything that would justify that conclusion. It was a custom and in part had to do with lineage and inheritance but that’s about it. I think that JS an BY had their own reasons for polygamy but most were justifications not a restoration of a divine “principle”.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.