Originally posted by tabibito
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
LDS - Mormonism Guidelines
Theists only.
Look! It's a bird, no it's a plane, no it's a bicycle built for two!
This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to the LDS - Mormons. This forum is generally for theists only, and is generaly not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theists may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.
Due to the sensitive nature of the LDS Temple Ceremonies to our LDS posters, we do not allow posting exact text of the temple rituals, articles describing older versions of the ceremony, or links that provide the same information. However discussion of generalities of the ceremony are not off limits. If in doubt, PM the area mod or an Admin
Non-theists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.
Forum Rules: Here
Look! It's a bird, no it's a plane, no it's a bicycle built for two!
This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to the LDS - Mormons. This forum is generally for theists only, and is generaly not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theists may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.
Due to the sensitive nature of the LDS Temple Ceremonies to our LDS posters, we do not allow posting exact text of the temple rituals, articles describing older versions of the ceremony, or links that provide the same information. However discussion of generalities of the ceremony are not off limits. If in doubt, PM the area mod or an Admin
Non-theists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Carbon Dioxide's Anti-Mormon Training Thread
Collapse
X
-
-
As I recall most marriages are marked by strife, one way or another. Take Mrs. Nabal for instance (1 Samuel 25).
Instruction in the First Century churches, that an elder should be the husband of but one wife would tend to suggest that polygamy wasn't unknown in some sectors, and that it was accepted for ordinary church members.
Additionally
http://christianthinktank.com/polygame.html
Polygamy was practiced somewhat in 1st century Palestinian Judaism
"There is evidence of the practice of polygamy in Palestinian Judaism in NT times (cf. J. Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus: An Investigation into Economic and Social Conditions during the New Testament Period, 1969, 90, 93, 369f.). Herod the Great (37-4 B.C.) had ten wives (Josephus, Ant. 17, 19f.; War 1,562) and a considerable harem (War 1,511). Polygamy and concubinage among the aristocracy is attested by Josephus, Ant. 12, 186ff.; 13, 380; War 1, 97. The continued practice of levirate marriage (Yeb. 15b) evidently led to polygamy, which was countenanced by the school of Shammai but not by that of Hillel.
Given the foregoing, if polygamy was prohibited in the NT Churches, stated opposition to the practice should be in the New Testament record.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostFair enough - but I had interpreted the statement to mean that Abraham had more than one wife at the same time. Which is not to say that I knew he had taken another wife ... and .... concubineS - that was a surprise.
Note that even this MORMON source has a hard time digesting this...
EVEN IF Biblical justification for polygamy was presented, one would have to advance to the case for polyandry. And note that FairMormon calls it Smith's "marital theology".
I can't make this stuff up!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostIn the face of records concerning people who had more than one wife concurrently without any trace of censure, I consider the interpretation unconvincing.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostAbraham married Keturah after Sarah died.
Actually, it doesn't. Levirate marriage applied to brothers living under the same roof, i.o.w. unmarried.
Gen. 2:24 is probably a more appropriate defense of monogamy.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by seven7up View PostWrong. Anybody who reads the context of that passage can see that it is an abomination when men multiply wives unto themselves without the command of God.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostAbraham had more than one wife? I thought his wife was Sarah, and that he had a concubine as well. (O.K. - there's no real distinction, but ...)
Levirate marriage does make monogamy impossible from time to time.
"shall not multiply wives" doesn't prohibit polygamy - "not multiply" doesn't mean only one. A matter that would have been established most readily by saying "take not more than one" where "not mulitply" might lead to ambiguity. Wives weren't the only condition subject to the "not multiply" restriction: acquisition of horses was also covered. Again, you shall not have more than one horse simply isn't a reasonable understanding.
In this point of difference between Mormon and standard church theologies, Mormon teaching was more closely in accord with the Bible.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by seven7up View PostJoseph's life was very difficult. Any objective observer could see that. He did not benefit in this life, but maybe he benefits for being faithful in this life, and thus is rewarded in the next.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by seven7up View PostYou all approach Joseph Smith with the decision already made in your mind that he was a false prophet. With that perspective, you will interpret everything you see about him in that light.
The point is that God commanded for and against something; even when that thing is not good or bad in and of itself.
Leave a comment:
-
Abraham had more than one wife? I thought his wife was Sarah, and that he had a concubine as well. (O.K. - there's no real distinction, but ...)
Levirate marriage does make monogamy impossible from time to time.
"shall not multiply wives" doesn't prohibit polygamy - "not multiply" doesn't mean only one. A matter that would have been established most readily by saying "take not more than one" where "not mulitply" might lead to ambiguity. Wives weren't the only condition subject to the "not multiply" restriction: acquisition of horses was also covered. Again, you shall not have more than one horse simply isn't a reasonable understanding.
In this point of difference between Mormon and standard church theologies, Mormon teaching was more closely in accord with the Bible.Last edited by tabibito; 08-04-2014, 01:25 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
7up: Critics could always argue that Paul was the one teaching what was "worthy" and what was "unworthy" , thus Paul wanted to exercise power of religion over others. Of course, those critics tend to think that all religions are meant to exercise power over others, and they argue from that assumption.
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostWe're not arguing from that assumption. How about addressing the argument actually made, not the one that's easier for you to dismiss?
You all approach Joseph Smith with the decision already made in your mind that he was a false prophet. With that perspective, you will interpret everything you see about him in that light.
I was comparing that to how non-religious people approach the Bible. Their mind is not open to it and view it as a collection of old myths, so they will view those things in a critical and negative light.
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostPork, shellfish, and certain other flesh was declared to be unclean under the Mosaic Covenant as a way of marking the Israelites as set apart;...
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostThe New Covenant established by Jesus' blood has different, non-ethnic markers, since it is intended for all people. This is rather different than something being reversed under the same covenant by the same "prophet."
-7upLast edited by seven7up; 08-04-2014, 01:08 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
7up: Joseph Smith did not "benefit" from "a new rule" that he "made up".
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostYeah, he did.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostThat's a crock -- he was always looking out for himself.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostSo, let's review this....
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostGod tells Smith to write the BoM, INCLUDING the part where polygamy is an abomination.
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. (Jacob 2:30)
Feel free to ask if you cannot comprehend what that verse means, however, I think you do. Just to be sure, I will provide you with Orson Pratt's explanation of that verse:
The Book of Mormon, therefore, is the only record (professing to be Divine) which condemns plurality of wives as being a practice exceedingly abominable before God. But even that sacred book makes an exception in substance as follows—"Except I the Lord command my people." The same Book of Mormon and the same article that commanded the Nephites that they should not marry more than one wife, made an exception. Let this be understood—"Unless I the Lord shall command them." We can draw the conclusion from this, that there were some things not right in the sight of God, unless he should command them. We can draw the same conclusion from the Bible, that there were many things which the Lord would not suffer his children to do, unless he particularly commanded them to do them.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostGod commands Smith to serially violate this prohibition.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostGod commands Smith to threaten his otherwise faithful wife with DESTRUCTION if she doesn't comply.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostGod then changes His mind, and polygamy is an abomination again.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostYou SERIOUSLY believe that?
The first instance of plural wives in the Bible was with Lamech in Genesis 4:19: “Lamech married two women.” Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, and others all had multiple wives. In 2 Samuel 12:8, God, speaking through the prophet Nathan, said that if David’s wives and concubines were not enough, He would have given David even more. Then, of course, there was Solomon.
So, David was allowed more than one wife and appeared to remain under the approval of the prophet Nathan. It was only in the case of Bathsheba where David made a series of very bad choices. The other polygamous Biblical leaders, kings and prophets erred when marrying wives who worshiped false gods or wives who then led them to make poor choices. The practice of polygamy in and of itself is not condemned in the Bible.
-7up
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Russianwolfe View PostAbritrary? What about pork and shellfish? Were these not forbidden in the OT but not in the NT? Is this the arbitrary God you are talking about? One who arbitrarily decides that pork is bad and then changes his mind?
Marvin
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Russianwolfe View PostAbritrary? What about pork and shellfish? Were these not forbidden in the OT but not in the NT? Is this the arbitrary God you are talking about? One who arbitrarily decides that pork is bad and then changes his mind?
Marvin
OH, and the fact that Smith and your Church flat out LIED about polygamy, even though it was, supposedly, a "commandment"....
Now, can you show where, in the NT we are COMMANDED to eat pork and shellfish?
Leave a comment:
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Leave a comment: