Why no concubines today?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_zzyzx
_Emeritus
Posts: 1042
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:31 pm

Why no concubines today?

Post by _zzyzx »

Doctrine and Covenants Section 132: 38:


38 David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me.

======

Why no concubines now? They aren't polygamy and per most laws these days in the US would not cause any legal problems. If it was good enough for David and company, why not Joseph, Tommy and the top Twelve?
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
_karl61
_Emeritus
Posts: 2983
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 6:29 pm

Re: Why no concubines today?

Post by _karl61 »

Given the tradition of secrecy it wouldn't really surprise me if they had them and if they did MAD would defend them.
Last edited by Guest on Thu Jun 18, 2009 10:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I want to fly!
_JohnStuartMill
_Emeritus
Posts: 1630
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:12 pm

Re: Why no concubines today?

Post by _JohnStuartMill »

Concubines are pretty great, from what I've heard.
"You clearly haven't read [Dawkins'] book." -Kevin Graham, 11/04/09
_DarkHelmet
_Emeritus
Posts: 5422
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 11:38 pm

Re: Why no concubines today?

Post by _DarkHelmet »

zzyzx wrote:Doctrine and Covenants Section 132: 38:


38 David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me.


supposedly this is God's voice. It is interesting that God would use the word "concubine" to describe these women, and then say David, Solomon, and Moses did not commit a sin. A concubine is a sex toy. And then God says he gave these guys their concubines.
"We have taken up arms in defense of our liberty, our property, our wives, and our children; we are determined to preserve them, or die."
- Captain Moroni - 'Address to the Inhabitants of Canada' 1775
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Why no concubines today?

Post by _harmony »

DarkHelmet wrote:supposedly this is God's voice. It is interesting that God would use the word "concubine" to describe these women, and then say David, Solomon, and Moses did not commit a sin. A concubine is a sex toy. And then God says he gave these guys their concubines.


Try to remember that there is always a man between God and you. And them. And that man really really really doesn't like women.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Paracelsus
_Emeritus
Posts: 503
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:29 am

Re: Why no concubines today?

Post by _Paracelsus »

JohnStuartMill wrote:Concubines are pretty great, from what I've heard.

Concubines are pretty great, from what I've experienced.
I know of nothing poorer
Under the sun, than you, you Gods!
...
Should I honour you? Why?

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe : Prometheus
_Benjamin McGuire
_Emeritus
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: Why no concubines today?

Post by _Benjamin McGuire »

Where concubines occur (at least historically), they represent a second tier in the marriage system. Concubines were legal wives (which is to say they were married, usually with a marriage contract of some sort, and so on), however, being a concubine didn't extend all of the same kinds of benefits that a wife would get extending primarily to social status and inheritance rights for the children.
_Some Schmo
_Emeritus
Posts: 15602
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:59 pm

Re: Why no concubines today?

Post by _Some Schmo »

harmony wrote:
DarkHelmet wrote:supposedly this is God's voice. It is interesting that God would use the word "concubine" to describe these women, and then say David, Solomon, and Moses did not commit a sin. A concubine is a sex toy. And then God says he gave these guys their concubines.


Try to remember that there is always a man between God and you. And them. And that man really really really doesn't like women.

Actually, it's just a man's voice pretending it's a god's voice. And it sounds to me like he really really really likes women.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Why no concubines today?

Post by _harmony »

Some Schmo wrote:
harmony wrote:Try to remember that there is always a man between God and you. And them. And that man really really really doesn't like women.

Actually, it's just a man's voice pretending it's a god's voice. And it sounds to me like he really really really likes women.


Agree with the 1st statement, disagree with the second. If he really liked women, they'd be more than second tier wives, more than sex toys. They'd be respected individuals who were treated like equals. And that takes out the majority of men today, LDS leaders included.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Some Schmo
_Emeritus
Posts: 15602
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:59 pm

Re: Why no concubines today?

Post by _Some Schmo »

harmony wrote:If he really liked women, they'd be more than second tier wives, more than sex toys. They'd be respected individuals who were treated like equals. And that takes out the majority of men today, LDS leaders included.

So your position is that the majority of men don't like women?
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Post Reply