Posted on 07/12/2013 3:47:27 PM PDT by Colofornian
'LAW' gets trumped when the Living Prophet® speaks...
In conclusion let us summarize this grand key, these “Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet”, for our salvation depends on them.
1. The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.
2. The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.
3. The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.
4. The prophet will never lead the church astray.
5. The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.
6. The prophet does not have to say “Thus Saith the Lord,” to give us scripture.
7. The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.
8. The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.
9. The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.
10. The prophet may advise on civic matters.
11. The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.
12. The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.
13. The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.
14. The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the First Presidency—follow them and be blessed—reject them and suffer.
I testify that these fourteen fundamentals in following the living prophet are true. If we want to know how well we stand with the Lord then let us ask ourselves how well we stand with His mortal captain—how close do our lives harmonize with the Lord’s anointed—the living Prophet—President of the Church, and with the Quorum of the First Presidency.
Ezra Taft Benson
(Address given Tuesday, February 26, 1980 at Brigham Young University) http://www.lds.org/liahona/1981/06/fourteen-fundamentals-in-following-the-prophet?lang=eng
And which one would that be?
Then by all normal thinking; the PROPHET should have been all OVER them other NON-prophets for having multiple wives; right?
Besides - 'tain't what MORMON scripture says:
The Doctrine and Covenants
Section 132
Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded 12 July 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant, and also the plurality of wives (see History of the Church, 5:501–7). Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831....58–66, Laws governing the plurality of wives are set forth.
58 Now, as touching the law of the apriesthood, there are many things pertaining thereunto.
59 Verily, if a man be called of my Father, as was aAaron, by mine own voice, and by the voice of him that bsent me, and I have endowed him with the ckeys of the power of this priesthood, if he do anything in my name, and according to my law and by my word, he will not commit dsin, and I will justify him.
60 Let no one, therefore, set on my servant Joseph; for I will justify him; for he shall do the sacrifice which I require at his hands for his transgressions, saith the Lord your God.
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse aanother, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have aten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to amultiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be bglorified.
64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.
65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take aHagar to wife.
66 And now, as pertaining to this law, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will reveal more unto you, hereafter; therefore, let this suffice for the present. Behold, I am Alpha and Omega. Amen.
I believe that polygamy is no longer practiced in the United States , as it is against the law.
Many LDS families chose to relocate to Canada and Mexico , where they could freely exercise their religion
I believe that there are many LDS families that continue in their religious practices in several foreign lands , without being encumbered by government CONTROL !!
So , I guess it continues ...
Old Testament: Deut. 17:17: 17 He must not take many wives...
But do you think that any one was only allowed one horse?
We could argue all day about what the exact meaning of 17:17 is.
I don,t know of any scripture that expressly forbids polygamy, as it does homosexuality.
Although there are no books written by Abraham or Jacob there would be no way of even knowing where the tribes of Israel came from with out some one writing about them
Abraham,s name is given as an example of what faith means in the NT.
There are most likely many other names that the Apostles could have used but they Chose to use his name because he was highly honored.
Jesus was a Jew or called a Jew, he was the founder of the Christian faith, not religion. he was a descendent of Abraham.
Isaiah 41
8
But you, Israel, are my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend.
9
You whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called you from the chief men thereof, and said to you, You are my servant; I have chosen you, and not cast you away.
Abraham was called the friend of God and Jacob was the father of the nation of Israel Abram had a concubine plus his wife.
Jacob had two wive,s and two concubines and while i do not use them nor Solomon or any one else as any proof that any one should have more than one wife or even has a right to more than one it is not an Abomination as some would have us believe.
Because if it were, Abraham and Jacob would not have been upheld by the very God that we believe in.
***You mean by ‘traditional’ those that actually BELIEVE what their SCRIPTURES require them to do?***
‘xactly!
You are reaching, time-wise, when you superimpose much later Solomonic & Davidic practices into the time span when Deuteronomy 25 was written.
If you look @ Dt. 26:1, it reads: "When you have entered the land the Lord your God is giving you..."...IOW, the Israelites were not even YET settled into their land God was giving them!
What we're talking about in Deut 25 was STILL part of the trek out of Egypt...wandering in the wilderness...
So, of course, God would set up special "tent-like" arrangements for such people on the move...often (by force) living in close proximity.
...we KNOW that Jews practiced polygamy.
So, tell us, up until Deut. 25...who practiced polygamy -- and in what circumstances?
(1) Jacob...hoodwinked into polygamy by his deceptive father-in-law...what? Do you think God uses deception to institutionalize polygamy?
(2) Was Isaac? (No) Moses? (No) Others?
(3) What about Abraham?
Was Abraham sleeping with Hagar God-sanctioned?
Where do you find that?
(a) God never told Abraham to sleep with Hagar for a night. The Angel of the Lord--whom most commentators think is the pre-incarnated Son of God, told Hagar post sleepover to return to her mistress (master Sarai) and to submit to mistress Sarai. (He never said to return to "your husband, Abram"...see Genesis 16) Two more things re:
(b) Hagar, even after sleeping with Abram once (that's all it's mentioned) continues to be labeled as a servant/slave by none other than…
…Abram,
…Sarai,
…the Angel of the Lord (who some say is the pre-incarnated Son of God),
…Moses (Gen. 25),
…even the apostle Paul (Gal. 4:21-31),
…and Hagar herself.
Sarai labels Hagar as a gift as a "wife" to Abram, but I question if a woman has the authority to "consent" on behalf of a slave.
Hagar was considered a slave both "before" and "after" sleeping with Abram. Why does the "before" matter? Just as a minor cannot "consent" to sex, a slave is in no better situation to "consent" to--or deny--her master's commands for sex. And in this case, the command didn't come from her husband, Abram; it came from her mistress (female word for "master"), Sarai (Sarai is twice referenced as "mistress"--Gen. 16:4,8).
Why does the "after" matter?
Because it shows she didn't become a "transformed" person--from slave to wifely status! Gen. 16:6,8,9; 21:11; 25:12; and Gal. 4:21-31 all are still referencing her as either a "slave" (twice in 21:11), "servant," or one who was told by the Angel to submit to her mistress (female word for "master"). By Gen. 25, Abraham is married to Keturah with no mention of Hagar (25:1) and is then buried with Sarah (25:10).
So, if we were to call all the key witnesses to the stand, and hear what they have to say:
Q Hagar, after Sarai gave you to Abram and Ishmael was conceived, did you still acknowledge Sarai as your "mistress" in your conversation with the Angel of the Lord? [female master]
A Yes. (Gen. 16:8)
Q Sarai, when you were in your early nineties when Isaac was a toddler, how did you characterize Hagar?
A I told Abraham, Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son, Isaac. (Gen. 21:10)
Q Abraham, after Sarah gave you Hagar and you slept with her, how did you characterize Hagar?
A I told Sarah, as mistress (master) of her servant, Your servant is in your hands. Do with her whatever you think best. (Gen. 16:6)
Q When Sarah began to mistreat her servant, Hagar, did you intervene like what we might expect a husband to do?
A No. Hagar was Sarah's servant.
Q Angel of the Lord, when you called to Hagar after she conceived Ishmael, how did you reference her?
A Servant of Sarai (Gen. 16:8)
Q And when you conversed with Hagar, did you, Angel of the Lord, acknowledge that she was released from her servant role to Sarai?
A No. In fact, I told her Go back to your mistress and submit to her. (Gen. 16:9)
Q Moses, since you wrote Genesis, how did you identify Hagar in her last reference of that book? Did you link her to Abraham?
A No. I identified her as "Sarah's maidservant" (Gen. 25:12).
Q So in that same passage, you link Ishmael to Abraham, but you link Hagar only to Sarah?
A Yes.
Q Apostle, Paul How did the Holy Spirit lead you to interpret the Old Covenant as expressed through Abraham?
A For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise. These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother...Now you brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? 'Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son.' Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. (Gal. 4:21-31)
16 The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the Lord has told you, “You are not to go back that way again.” 17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray.
Taxcontrol...tis obvious that much greater allowance on the number of horses is there...notice "great numbers of horses..." ...Deut 17:17 doesn't say "great numbers of wives," now does it?
And notice the REASON..."or his heart will be led astray." (Which is EXACTLY how 1 Kings 11:3 describes Solomon's polygamy)
Your conversion of not allowing GREAT NUMBERS of horses into "single-horse" status is reductionism.
Yes, I know...not having "Many wives" can still be interpreted into a two-wife man...but that would be implied...not overtly sanctioned...by God.
Deut 17: 15-18
15 Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.
16 But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the Lord hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.
17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.
18 And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites:
“Because if it were, Abraham and Jacob would not have been upheld by the very God that we believe in.”
The amazing veracity of the Bible is reflected in the recording of human behavior - good, bad and evil.
That something is recorded does not mean it is a reflection of God’s desires, His standard or as a model for us.
That God uses sinful men and women - upholding them, as you phrased it - is not unusual. He has no other kind of human to work with!
Yet He works His will through fallen humans.
Abraham - concubines ... see Genesis 25:5 – 7
When Miriam spoke against Moses' SECOND marriage to the Ethiopian (Kushite - descendant of Kush) woman? How did God respond to her actions? Did God bless her or curse her? ....see Numbers 12:1-15
Exodus 21:10 If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.
Gen 4:19-24 Lamech and his two wives
Nahor (brother of Abram) - wife: Milcah concubine: Reumah (Gen 22:24)
Moses father Amram had two wives, Ishar and Jochebed
There was a whole lot of polygamy going on with the Jews before Moses. Enough that I would venture to say that it was common enough to not cause a scandal.
So reducing verse 16 to “one” is reductionism but reducing verse 17 to “one” is not??? I don’t understand how it applies differently.
Why do you assume Moses' FIRST wife was still alive? (Got something vs. serial monogamy?)
Gen 4:19-24 Lamech and his two wives
Lamech was a descendent of murderer Cain. Pre-covenant. [Next thing you know, you'll start citing Ghengis Khan, Tamerlane, and King Mongut of Siam (the latter with his 9,000 wives) as some "evidence" that their pagan polygamy was somehow "righteous", too!!!]
Nahor (brother of Abram) - wife: Milcah concubine: Reumah (Gen 22:24)
OK, Abraham was THE patriarch for a reason...THE start of THIS nation of Israel. [It wasn't Abram & Nahor as THE founding patriarchs]
Moses father Amram had two wives, Ishar and Jochebed
Jochebed, yes...1 Chronicles 23:12 and Exodus 6:18 says: The sons of Kohath; Amram, Ishar,[also spelled Izhar] Hebron, and Uzziel, four.
Ishar was Moses' uncle...or are you saying he was some early cross-dressing concubine, too??? Abraham - concubines ... see Genesis 25:5 – 7
Biblical commentators say these "concubines" were none other than Hagar + Keturah, the latter who "moved up" into wife status (see Gen. 25:1: 25 Abraham had taken another wife, whose name was Keturah
No other women are mentioned tied to Abraham ... except for first wife Sarai/Sarah...And we know that by the time Keturah became a "wife"...Sarah had died: Sarah lived to be a hundred and twenty-seven years old. 2 She died at Kiriath Arba (that is, Hebron) in the land of Canaan, and Abraham went to mourn for Sarah and to weep over her. (Genesis 23)
If "concubines" were considered official "wives" -- then Keturah moving from "concubine" to "wife" status as of Gen. 25:1 would have been redundant/unnecessary.
So I'll recap this all for you next post...
Sorry, but both your examples of Lamech & Nahor weren't deemed as part of that new nation of Israel. (You flunk Old Testament history)
There's absolutely NO proof offered up by you that as of Deut. 25, that Moses had 2 wives...As a matter of fact, he was as of Deut. 25 married ONLY to Zipporah...and there's absolutely no proof offered up by your presumption that Zipporah was still alive when Moses LATER married a Cushite woman.
Your Amram-Jochebed-uncle triangle was a "joke-in-bed" right?
And we KNOW that NO other woman was accorded WIFE status to Abraham other than Sarah...and Ketureh AFTER Sarah died.
In Gen. 16, Abram, the Angel of the Lord and Hagar herself reference her as ONLY a servant of Sarai. Moses does the same in Gen. 21; and so does Paul in Galatians 4.
Likewise, so does Sarah AFTER Hagar slept with Abram.
All of that, btw, was evidence of DISTRUST in God...they didn't believe that God could ensure that an aging Sarai would become pregnant.
You have floundered greatly. NO proof ... at all...that polygamy was in practice by covenant Jews by Deut. 25 other than by deception & then wifely rivalries (Gen. 30)... and the temporary sleeping arrangements of Gen. 16 was by distrust in God's promises....in which neither Abram, the Angel of the Lord, or even Hagar herself reference Hagar as the "wife" of Abram!
There you have it
58 Now, as touching the law of the apriesthood, there are many things pertaining thereunto.
Again
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse aanother, and the first give her consent
59
Verily, if a man be called of my Father, as was aAaron, by mine own voice, and by the voice of him that bsent me, and I have endowed him with the ckeys of the power of this priesthood, if he do anything in my name, and according to my law and by my word, he will not commit dsin, and I will justify him.
Appears to me that Any man who is a priest is what it means. at any rate the scriptures were to protect Joesepth Smith, he was the one called, he was the one endowed with the power of the priesthood he was the one who was wanting many women.
In a lot of this country back in the 1800s wild horse,s were plentiful so many of the ranchers went out and captured more that what they needed but when the fences came and the free range dwindled the horses were eating up the grass that the cows needed so many were ready to get rid of a bunch of horses they could not afford.
Jews operating in Deut 17 times would reference themselves back to Noah's ark. In the ark, there would have been at least TWO horses...one male; one female. [see Gen. 7:2,15] No king would have had fewer than two such horses to see to the continuation of that breed.
Your attempt, therefore, to reduce a King's horse stall to just one as some sort of parallel therefore ignores Biblical history and Jewish culture...both a cardinal sin of basic Biblical hermeneutics as well as reductionism.
...reducing verse 17 to “one” is not???
(a) Because a man wouldn't in the same way necessarily need more than one wife to ensure his seed is passed on. Right?
(b) Because culturally -- and historically -- the Jews of Deut 17 were rooted in Genesis 2:24, were they not?
24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his WIFE [not "wives" right?], and they become one flesh.
Are you somehow claiming that "sister wives" plural are "one flesh" with each other? Really? (If so, what kind of apologist are you then for lesbian "marriage"???? I expect an answer here)
And why do you either outright IGNORE -- or gloss over -- Gen. 2:24 in this whole discussion???? As if the EARLY Jews -- and that's what we are discussing here -- would have somehow "written off" Gen. 2:24 as irrelevant to them.
(c) Lastly in pre-modern med times, women died early...often while giving birth. A man being told to refrain from "many wives" may have indeed had more than one wife...but it's up to YOU to offer evidence that this was bigamy/polygamy -- and not serial monogamy arising AFTER the death of a previous wife.
Since YOU are the one arguing from silence, YOU need to produce the evidential timetable case that "many wives" = polygamy. There's 2 or 3 Lds "apostles" RIGHT now who are serial monogamists. (To hear you tell it, just because they have been sealed to more than one wife in the Lds temple, they are somehow automatically presumed to be CURRENT polygamists...]
AND...finally even where you could find 1 or 2 instances where polygamy indeed occurred in Genesis times, your insinuation that God somehow smiled upon it...or it wasn't rooted in sin...or that it was in any way, shape or form common is also "MIA" of any real Biblical substance.
What? Do you think you can just cite Jacob's family as some sort of prototype of marriage? Really?
What would you do next? Cite Gomer's "cottage industry" of post-marital prostitution -- as she was married to Hosea -- and claim that since God allowed that to occur, it would be "a-ok" for the Mormon "prophet" to dictate marital "cottage industry" prostitution? [After all, wasn't Hosea a "righteous man???"]
You'd be one sick puppy if you tried to claim this...and yet that is about tantamount to what you're doing!
You've offered absolutely NO proof that this was COMMON by the WILDERNESS time that the latter part of Deut. was enunciated in Hebrew culture.
And we KNOW that NO other woman was accorded WIFE status to Abraham other than Sarah...and Ketureh AFTER Sarah died.
To be his wife.
That God uses sinful men and women - upholding them, as you phrased it - is not unusual. He has no other kind of human to work with!
Abraham and Jacob were real men of God who never tried to be anything but what they were.
If your wife had an illegal alien as a "housekeeper"/slave...and she told the alien woman that as long as she did what she was told, she could remain in this country....If your wife "gave" you this alien for a night, or a week, or a month...for sexual purposes...and said beforehand this alien was your "second wife..."
(a) Your wife would have no such LEGAL authority to make the woman your "wife";
(b) A slave has no rights...by definition...and could not even say "no" to such an arrangement
A woman in that time & culture would have had ZILCHO authority to make another woman a "wife..."
Do you think Sarah referenced Hagar as a "wife" post-pregnancy? Nope: “Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac.” (Genesis 21:10)
And, why, when we read the REST of Genesis 16...doesn't the Angel of the Lord reference Hagar in her relationship to Abram? Why does He define her according to her servant/slave relationship to Sarai?
Why does the Angel of the Lord say: “Go back to your mistress and submit to her.” IF, indeed, Hagar was a recognized "wife" of Abram, why didn't this Angel say: "Go back to your husband and submit to him"???
And why does Abram do that EXACT same thing? (He STILL...in 16:6 references her as "YOUR SLAVE")
And why does Hagar herself do that? She ran away NOT from her "husband" Abram...but her "mistress" Sarah...["mistress" being the counterpart of the word "master"]
And why does the apostle Paul do that re: Hagar in Galatians 4?
Tell us Ravenwolf...why does Paul CONSTANTLY reference Hagar as a "slave woman"...Gal. 4:22...again in Gal. 4:23...again in Gal. 4:24...again in Gal. 4:25...again in Gal. 4:30...
Didn't Hagar ever "graduate" from such a lowly status?
Nope...not in the Angel of the Lord's eyes; not in Abraham's eyes; not in Moses' eyes (Gen. 25); not in Paul's eyes; not in Hagar herself's eyes; and NOT, post-pregnancy, in Sarah's eyes, either.
“I think exactly the same way, so as long as God in no place that i have found said any thing about plural marriage being an abomination such as homosexuality, why all of the rage against Mormons and polygamy, when all God had was favorable words concerning Abraham and Jacob.”
Not hard to answer. God told all of us HIS IDEAL. Do it. Christ reaffirmed the Genesis definition.
Mormons try to normalize what God never called normal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.