The Book of Mormon condemns the Practice of Polygamy.

[_Brackite]

Hello all here,

Over On the MA&D Message Board a little while ago, there was a thread started by an LDS Critic who is now banned on that Message Board about the Contradiction between Jacob Chapter two, and Doctrine and Section 132. Here is the opening Post from that now closed discussion thread there:

Jacob 2:24 (in the Book of Mormon) states:

Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord. (http://scriptures.LDS.org/en/jacob/2/24#24).

But in the revelation on polygamy written down by Joseph Smith on July 12, 1843 (the text later became D&C 132), it states in verse 1:

Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—

Why the incongruency?

Duane (my buddy) pointed out that the Book of Mormon was written prior to 1830, before Joseph Smith had any plural wives. However, the revelation on polygamy that became D&C 132 was written on July 12, 1843. By that time, Joseph had at least 27 plural wives (http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org).

Here is the URL to that now closed Discussion thread there:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=33833


The third Post on that Discussion thread was posted by an LDS Apologist there, giving the typical LDS Apologetic response to this Contradiction between Jacob Chapter two and Doctrine and Covenants Section 132. Now Here is the third Post from that Discussion thread there:

No incongruency at all if you read the entire passages in context:

QUOTE
(Jacob 2:27-30) "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; For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts. Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes. 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.

"Now read in section 132:

QUOTE
(D&C 132:34-39) "God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises. Was Abraham, therefore, under condemnation? Verily I say unto you, Nay; for I, the Lord, commanded it. Abraham was commanded to offer his son Isaac; nevertheless, it was written: Thou shalt not kill. Abraham, however, did not refuse, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness. Abraham received concubines, and they bore him children; and it was accounted unto him for righteousness, because they were given unto him, and he abode in my law; as Isaac also and Jacob did none other things than that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their exaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not angels but are gods. 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. David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord."

You see the point? When the Lord commands it is right, when He does not, then it is not right.

However, This Post does Not refute the Contradiction that is between Jacob Chapter two and Doctrine and Covenants Section 132. I explained this in a Commentary and exegesis of Jacob chapter two, verse 24, along with Jacob chapter two, verse seven on a Post of mine in another Discussion thread here. Now here is my Commentary and exegesis of Jacob chapter two, verse 24, along with Jacob chapter two, verse seven.

Here is Jacob Chapter two, Verse Seven:

Jacob 2:7:

[7] And also it grieveth me that I must use so much boldness of speech concerning you, before your wives and your children, many of whose feelings are exceedingly tender and chaste and delicate before God, which thing is pleasing unto God;

Now, Here is Jacob Chapter two, Verse 24:

Jacob 2:24:

[24] Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

It was Not how or the way how King David and King Solomon had many wives and concubines that was abominable before the Lord God, It is that they just truly actually in fact had many wives and concubines, which was indeed abominable before the Lord God. This interpretation is very, very much in harmony with the obvious interpretation of Jacob 2:7, which does Not mean it was the how or the way how the wives' and children's feelings are exceedingly tender and chaste and delicate before God, it means very much of what it states, is that, the wives; and children's feelings are truly indeed exceedingly tender and chaste and delicate before the Lord God. King David And King Solomon in fact truly having many wives and concubines, by itself, is that which was indeed truly abominable before the Lord God.

Now here is my Commentary and exegesis of Jacob chapter two, verse 30, along with 1 Nephi chapter seven, verse one, and 1 Nephi chapter 16, verses seven and eight:

Here is Jacob 2:30:

Jacob 2:

[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 Lord God intends to command His People in order to raise up seed unto Him. This is really meaning raising up seed unto the Lord. It can and will be done through Monogamy. The Lord God intends to raise up seed unto Him, through Monogamy, NOT Polygamy, as can be seen when comparing Jacob 2:30 to 1 Nephi 7:1, and then correctly comparing 1 Nephi 7:1 to 1 Nephi 16:7-8. Here is again 1 Nephi 7:1 Compared to, to 1 Nephi 16:7-8:

1 Nephi 7:

[1] And now I would that ye might know, that after my father, Lehi, had made an end of prophesying concerning his seed, it came to pass that the Lord spake unto him again, saying that it was not meet for him, Lehi, that he should take his family into the wilderness alone; but that his sons should take daughters to wife, that they might raise up seed unto the Lord in the land of promise.

1 Nephi 16:

[7] And it came to pass that I, Nephi, took one of the daughters of Ishmael to wife; and also, my brethren took of the daughters of Ishmael to wife; and also Zoram took the eldest daughter of Ishmael to wife.

[8] And thus my father had fulfilled all the commandments of the Lord which had been given unto him. And also, I, Nephi, had been blessed of the Lord exceedingly.

The phrase, 'raise up seed unto the Lord' in the Book of Mormon means that the Lord God wants to raise up a righteous seed; righteous children, righteous sons and daughters, unto the Lord God. The Lord God intends to 'raise up seed unto the Him' in the Book of Mormon by meaning that the Lord will command just Monogamy to raise up seed unto Him.

Conclusion: The Book of Mormon fully condemns the Practice of Polygamy.

[_Inconceivable]

That's good enough for me Brackite.

My impression is that Joseph Smith and his adulterous buddies either never read or forgot much of the Book of Mormon.

Jacob 2 is a discourse upon the subject of chastity. The primary reason the fictitious Jacob was moved to speak was because his people were living the abominable practice of Mormon adultery.

No God and no man needs more than one wife to increase baby production for a society, righteous or otherwise.

The fuzzy math used to attempt to prove otherwise runs parallel to the formulas used to promote MLM - a sub economy of Mormonism.

[_Scottie]

I don't have much to add, other than to say great post, Brackite!

[_LifeOnaPlate]

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.

This verse still flies in the face of your conclusion, indicating that God can instruct people to live the law of plural marriage. I think your exegesis is interesting, but I do not limit "raising seed" to monogamous relationship in every case throughout all time. (Check Brant Gardner's book Second Witness vol. 1, he makes an interesting case for the possibility of plural marriage among the Lehites. I'm not totally convinced; I don't know either way.)

[_truth dancer]

This verse still flies in the face of your conclusion, indicating that God can instruct people to live the law of plural marriage.

I'm with Brackite on this. He has done an excellent job showing how the Book of Mormon clearly states polygamy is an abomination and should not be practiced.

However, EVEN if we go with the apologetic that God can command polygamy there is NEVER any retraction that polygamy is an abomination. It clearly states it breaks the hearts of His daughters.

How much more clear can scripture be?

It is an abomination. Whether one wants to argue that God can command it or not (I personally find this argument silly), Jesus said is AN ABOMINATION and it breaks the hearts of women.

These LDS guys who are jumping at the bit and rationalizing their dream for multiple girls and women seem to forget that Jesus Christ himself (if they actually believe in their scriptures), stated their fantasy is an abomination and will break the hearts of their wives and daughters. Seems they do not care. :-(


~dancer~

[_LifeOnaPlate]

The Book of Mormon text speaks for itself. Let he or she who reads make the decision.

[_the road to hana]

Since Joseph Smith wrote both, the interesting question to explore is why one point of view is expressed in the Book of Mormon and a contrary one in the D&C. Does it represent an evolution in his thought process, or was it just an overlooked inconsistency?

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Since Joseph Smith wrote both, the interesting question to explore is why one point of view is expressed in the Book of Mormon and a contrary one in the D&C. Does it represent an evolution in his thought process, or was it just an overlooked inconsistency?

Man alive, you aren't even well versed in the criticism of Mormonism, let alone Mormonism itself. When you find out that the ex-mo's have suppressed their theories about this anomaly from you are you going to lash out? Cry foul? ;)

[_the road to hana]

Since Joseph Smith wrote both, the interesting question to explore is why one point of view is expressed in the Book of Mormon and a contrary one in the D&C. Does it represent an evolution in his thought process, or was it just an overlooked inconsistency?

Man alive, you aren't even well versed in the criticism of Mormonism, let alone Mormonism itself. When you find out that the ex-mo's have suppressed their theories about this anomaly from you are you going to lash out? Cry foul? ;)

Your statement makes no sense, but whatever. I probably knew the Book of Mormon contradicted D&C 132 before you were a pup.

[_RockHeaded]

Hey Bracki! Good to see you again. Just wanted to chime in. You've made some good points, I just wanted to add that when one reads that whole chapter in Jacob it is obvious that polygamy is being condemned. I've read through the justification the Utah Church uses with Jacob and it makes no sense. In order to get this justification the reader has to ignore most of the chapter and focus on one verse. By doing that the Utah Church has taken Jacob out of context to justify a perverse doctrine (or pleasure). The FLDS church has shown us yet again why it is an abomination to God.


RockHeaded