Polygamy and levirate marriage

[Cow Poke]

Though not strictly prohibited, it is more desirable for man to have at most one horse.

Your credibility really falls when you do this dumb comparing wives to horses. And, have you ever HAD horses? This is just a wacky comparison.

[ZackMartin]

Your credibility really falls when you do this dumb comparing wives to horses

He's not the one doing it; the Bible itself invites the comparison through its use of parallelism with respect to both wives and horses. I don't think wives and horses have anything much at all in common (obviously they have a few things in common, but almost everything has at least one thing in common with almost everything else); the comparison only comes up because the Bible says a very similar thing ("the King must not multiply them") about both in the same context. If it was not for the Bible making the comparison, the comparison would have never occurred to me, and I'd never make that comparison outside of the context of trying to interpret this particular biblical text.

[Cow Poke]

He's not the one doing it; the Bible itself invites the comparison through its use of parallelism with respect to both wives and horses. I don't think wives and horses have anything much at all in common (obviously they have a few things in common, but almost everything has at least one thing in common with almost everything else); the comparison only comes up because the Bible says a very similar thing ("the King must not multiply them") about both in the same context. If it was not for the Bible making the comparison, the comparison would have never occurred to me, and I'd never make that comparison outside of the context of trying to interpret this particular biblical text.

While everything you say here is factual, it has nothing to do with NT culture and "one wife" vs. however many horses you may have.

But, I see your point.

[RevTestament]

I'm sure there's an obvious Mormon response, but what about the New Testament "husband of one wife" reference?

And how many bishops do you know with one wife? Catholic bishops of course have none.
There is no getting around God condoning polygamy in the Old Testament. He told David through his prophet, Nathan, that he had given him his wives, but that he had still mucked it up by desiring the wife(Bathsheba) of a married man. He gave a law of inheritance if a man have 2 wives. He picked his prophets from polygamous families. For instance Samuel was the son of one of the 2 wives of Elkenah. Does the Lord ever change the law? Why yes. Christianity did away with the laws of food uncleanness, etc. Can the Lord change the law again?

Admittedly, this is a controversial topic in the history of the LDS church. Sidney Rigdon took the position to follow the admonition the Lord gave the Nephites in The Book of Mormon to have only one wife, and left the church basically over this. However, the Lord made it clear that the Nephites were hurting the hearts of their wives, and abusing the Judaic law. But this really attests that polygamy was recognized under the Mosaic law. If the Lord deems it expedient, I'm sure He could allow it again. However, I think the people of this day and age have enough trouble honoring their covenants to one spouse.

[Cow Poke]

And how many bishops do you know with one wife? Catholic bishops of course have none.
There is no getting around God condoning polygamy in the Old Testament. He told David through his prophet, Nathan, that he had given him his wives, but that he had still mucked it up by desiring the wife(Bathsheba) of a married man. He gave a law of inheritance if a man have 2 wives. He picked his prophets from polygamous families. For instance Samuel was the son of one of the 2 wives of Elkenah. Does the Lord ever change the law? Why yes. Christianity did away with the laws of food uncleanness, etc. Can the Lord change the law again?

Admittedly, this is a controversial topic in the history of the LDS church. Sidney Rigdon took the position to follow the admonition the Lord gave the Nephites in The Book of Mormon to have only one wife, and left the church basically over this. However, the Lord made it clear that the Nephites were hurting the hearts of their wives, and abusing the Judaic law. But this really attests that polygamy was recognized under the Mosaic law. If the Lord deems it expedient, I'm sure He could allow it again. However, I think the people of this day and age have enough trouble honoring their covenants to one spouse.

Well, that was all... um....

How bout taking a crack at the actual question.... emphasis on NEW TESTAMENT, OK?

I'm sure there's an obvious Mormon response, but what about the New Testament "husband of one wife" reference?

[RevTestament]

Left practically speechless?

You ignored my question of how many bishops you know with one wife. See 1 Timothy. I was Baptist too. I know ye have no Bishops. Now why is that? Do you not follow the NT?

[Cow Poke]

Left practically speechless?

You ignored my question of how many bishops you know with one wife. See 1 Timothy. I was Baptist too. I know ye have no Bishops. Now why is that? Do you not follow the NT?

You DO realize it's not just Bishops, don't you? And it need not be limited to the ENGLISH meaning of the word. Context. And, actually, I know SEVERAL Bishops with one wife each.

[RevTestament]

Yep, deacons too. I know baptists do have deacons with one wife. Are the bishops you are referring to Baptist?

[Cow Poke]

Yep, deacons too. I know baptists do have deacons with one wife. Are the bishops you are referring to Baptist?

No... there seems to be this "new thang" in the Charismatic community, particularly, where "pastors" have become themselves "bishops". And it's Elders, in addition to Deacons and Bishops... "Church Leadership" in general --- in some places, translated "overseer".

[Bill the Cat]

And how many bishops do you know with one wife?

Several. 2 of them are close personal friends.

Catholic bishops of course have none.

Through personal choice.

There is no getting around God condoning polygamy in the Old Testament.

Condoning and commanding are two different things.

He told David through his prophet, Nathan, that he had given him his wives, but that he had still mucked it up by desiring the wife(Bathsheba) of a married man.

And as I have already said, wives in those days were political pawns to solidify treaties with neighboring rulers. God gave David Saul's wives because Saul made covenants between them and Israel, which God continued to honor through David and then Solomon.

He gave a law of inheritance if a man have 2 wives. He picked his prophets from polygamous families. For instance Samuel was the son of one of the 2 wives of Elkenah.

Because he was wealthy and could afford to care for them.

Jdg 21:25 In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

Does the Lord ever change the law?

Absolutely not!!

English Standard Version
Matthew 5:18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

Luke 16:17 It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.

Why yes. Christianity did away with the laws of food uncleanness, etc.

No it didn't. If one follows Torah, they are still required BY LAW to abstain from forbidden foods. However, when one lives BY GRACE, the Law has no hold on them. That's why Jesus said "A NEW COMMANDMENT" was being given.

Can the Lord change the law again?

Since He never changed it, no.

Admittedly, this is a controversial topic in the history of the LDS church. Sidney Rigdon took the position to follow the admonition the Lord gave the Nephites in The Book of Mormon to have only one wife, and left the church basically over this.

Completely untrue! He was kicked out because he continued to hound the leaders that he should have been the successor, or "Guardian of the Church" after Joseph's death.

Elder Hyde continued and said: . . . When we demanded his [Rigdon's] license, he said, "I did not receive it from you, neither shall I give it up to you." He then threatened to turn traitor. His own language was, inasmuch as you have demanded my license, I shall feel it my duty to publish all your secret meetings, and all the history of the secret works of this church, in the public journals. . . . He was the cause of our troubles in Missouri, and although Brother Joseph tried to restrain him, he would take his own course, and if he goes to exposing the secrets of this church, as he says, the world will throw him down and trample him under their feet.

(Grant, J. M., 1844. A Collection of Facts, Relative to the Course Taken By Elder Sidney Rigdon, In the States of Ohio, Missouri, Illinois and Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pages 650-661.)

However, the Lord made it clear that the Nephites were hurting the hearts of their wives, and abusing the Judaic law.

Which law?

But this really attests that polygamy was recognized under the Mosaic law.

I don't think anyone ever claimed that it was outlawed under Torah.

If the Lord deems it expedient, I'm sure He could allow it again.

Allowing it and commanding it under threat of destruction are different beasts altogether.

However, I think the people of this day and age have enough trouble honoring their covenants to one spouse.

Because it is rarely seen as a covenant these days.

[Cow Poke]

I know baptists do have deacons with one wife.

Actually, each of our deacons has his OWN wife -- we frown on sharing them.

[RevTestament]

Through personal choice.

No, Not really. I bet I could find Catholic priests who would marry if their church would let them remain a priest. In fact the prohibition against marriage was introduced at the turn of the last millenium. This fulfilled prophecy of 1 Timothy that
1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry...
However, the Bible teaches that a man should leave his Father and Mother in order to get married and become one flesh.

Condoning and commanding are two different things.

So if something is wicked, it is OK for God to condone it, and give laws which recognize it? Again fact is God didn't view polygamy as wicked. I will concede though that God has never commanded a man to marry more than one wife in the Bible.

And as I have already said, wives in those days were political pawns to solidify treaties with neighboring rulers. God gave David Saul's wives because Saul made covenants between them and Israel, which God continued to honor through David and then Solomon.

Your argument really only applies to David and Solomon, whom God became displeased with. It doesn't apply to Abraham, Israel, and most all the other polygamous unions discussed in the Bible through whom God blessed the entire world.

If one follows Torah, they are still required BY LAW to abstain from forbidden foods. However, when one lives BY GRACE, the Law has no hold on them. That's why Jesus said "A NEW COMMANDMENT" was being given.

You are skirting the issue. The law was changed, because a new law was given that changed it.
Let's see, Jesus was circumcised to fulfill the law. Yet Christians need not be circumcised to fulfill the law. Since the time of Jesus it profits a Jew nothing to be physically circumcised. He gains no salvation points. Jesus fulfilled the law, so it was not needed anymore, and was abrogated. A new commandment is a new law - a change. You had better review these principles in the sermon on the mount. A new commandment replaces any old commandment on the point, otherwise we would all still be living under the Mosaic law, or if I understand your position, we are all still breaking the law and thus sinning, but are just forgiven through the grace of Christ.

re: Sidney Rigdon

Completely untrue! He was kicked out because he continued to hound the leaders that he should have been the successor, or "Guardian of the Church" after Joseph's death.

Elder Hyde continued and said: . . . When we demanded his [Rigdon's] license, he said, "I did not receive it from you, neither shall I give it up to you." He then threatened to turn traitor. His own language was, inasmuch as you have demanded my license, I shall feel it my duty to publish all your secret meetings, and all the history of the secret works of this church, in the public journals. . . . He was the cause of our troubles in Missouri, and although Brother Joseph tried to restrain him, he would take his own course, and if he goes to exposing the secrets of this church, as he says, the world will throw him down and trample him under their feet.

(Grant, J. M., 1844. A Collection of Facts, Relative to the Course Taken By Elder Sidney Rigdon, In the States of Ohio, Missouri, Illinois and Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pages 650-661.)

And why did the church not want Sidney Rigdon to be prophet? Because there had been no revelation calling him to prophet, and he was known to dislike plural marriage which had been revealed as being permissible. So he got excommunicated in this manner, and tried to start 2 other churches without any polygamy. The church tried to be kind about it I think to give him room to return if he repented, but the real meat of it all was that he did not accept plural marriage. This was an issue behind Joseph Smith's moves to disfellowship him earlier.

[Sparko]

So Revtestament,

1. Why did the LDS stop practicing plural marriage
2. Do you think they should have stopped or defied the government and obeyed God instead?

[Chrawnus]

However, the Bible teaches that a man should leave his Father and Mother in order to get married and become one flesh.

More specifically, the Bible teaches that a man should leave his father and mother, and be joined with his wife, and they shall become one flesh. The LXX, Syriac, Arabic and Samaritan read, "they two shall become one flesh" which Matthew 19:5, Mark 10:8, 1 Cor 6:16, and Eph 5:31 also does.

So if something is wicked, it is OK for God to condone it, and give laws which recognize it? Again fact is God didn't view polygamy as wicked. I will concede though that God has never commanded a man to marry more than one wife in the Bible.

I already answered this in post #24. Read Matthew 19:7-9 which shows that God permitted certain behaviour due to the hardness of the human heart. In Malachi 2:16 God goes so far as to say that He hates divorce, but somehow he still permitted divorce in the OT. There seem to be certain behaviour or conduct which God dislikes/hates, but which he put up with under the old covenant, due to the hardness of the human heart.

You are skirting the issue. The law was changed, because a new law was given that changed it.
Let's see, Jesus was circumcised to fulfill the law. Yet Christians need not be circumcised to fulfill the law. Since the time of Jesus it profits a Jew nothing to be physically circumcised. He gains no salvation points. Jesus fulfilled the law, so it was not needed anymore, and was abrogated. A new commandment is a new law - a change. You had better review these principles in the sermon on the mount. A new commandment replaces any old commandment on the point, otherwise we would all still be living under the Mosaic law, or if I understand your position, we are all still breaking the law and thus sinning, but are just forgiven through the grace of Christ.

The law was never intended for anyone but the Jewish people. It was a contract/covenant between the Israelites and God, not between God and all of humanity. As such, it's incorrect to say that we would all still be living under the Mosaic law unless the new covenant replaced the old covenant, simply because gentiles were never under the Mosaic law in the first place. It was a law that applied only to the land of Israel. It applied to no other people but the tribes of Israel, just as the law of any country (such Sweden/USA/Canada/Finland) doesn't apply to anyone but the citizens there, and those who wished to visit the land briefly for some reason, or live there as foreigners. In short, the Mosaic law does not apply to anyone who does not choose to enter (through circumcision) the old covenant which God made with Israel.

[RevTestament]

I believe your questions should be addressed to the leadership since I do not know their motives. I assume they saw the leadership being thrown in jail so went to the Lord in prayer to find his will. As I read the relevant law, there was no commandment to marry plural wives. It was allowed, but the Lord did not command it in general. So I do not see it as a big deal for the Lord to suspend it. Suspension definitely stopped a major weapon being used against the church. Plural marriage had probably served its major purpose - to help women who had lost their husbands in the persecutions of the midwest either through being killed or more often dying from hardship and exposure in forced moves, etc.
Revelation 12
11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. (this is 1260 days or prophetic years)

15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.

16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.