No polygamy does not justify gay marriage

I wrote this in response to another person trying to teach that polygamy meant that there is nothing wrong with taking a perversion like homosexuality and having the state approve it as a marriage. Their point was the Joseph Smith had many wives so that was “a change in marriage”, so we should approve of gay marriage too:
———————

The revelation to Joseph Smith wasn’t a new revelation, but a restoration of something old. Joseph Smith asked about the polygamous marriages he found in the bible, and the Lord stated:
“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”

The fact that this isn’t new is also found in the book of Mormon.

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.

Polygamous marriages existed as far back as Adam and Eve’s day when we read of Lamech speaking to his wives. Polygamy has been around since the beginning. It is found and practiced by prophets in the scriptures. It is not a new marriage. But it is, as the Lord instructed Jacob, only given when the Lord needs to raise up seed.

Homosexuality also shows up in the scriptures, but not among the prophets. Instead the Lord declares in the old testament that those who participate in homosexuality or beastiality are to be slain. That was in a day when Moses was married to multiple women. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by the Lord for homosexuality in a day when the prophet Abraham, who lived near those cities, was living polygamously as commanded by the Lord. In the new testament Paul states of homosexuals that because of their wickedness the Lord gave them over to a reprobate mind. Both polygamy and homosexuality show up in the scriptures, but they show up very differently. One is universally condemned as an abomination. The other exists from the beginning, and the times and conditions under which it will be practiced are clearly laid out by the Lord.

Regarding some of Joseph Smith’s wives being young, that is just a matter of convention. Many worldly people now first seek marriage a decade older than the previous generation. But that isn’t a change in the definition of marriage. It is likely that none of the apostles in the new testament married a girl older than 15 years old, given the conventions of their day. The girl Juliette in “Romeo and Juliette” is stated to be 13 years old in the play, but still of marriageable age. In Joseph Smiths day marriage to a girl of 14 or 15 was uncommon, but still acceptable enough that you likely have female ancestors, and almost certainly have female relatives of your ancestors that married at or near those ages. I have one that married at 15 and one that married at 16 just in the ones I know of. This is not a change in the definition of marriage. Just a change in when it is typical to marry. In days of short life spans and poverty, marriage at younger ages, and particularly marriage of a younger girl to a man who can provide for her is far more common than in days of long life and prosperity.

Advertisements

Published by

John Robertson

I am nothing more than a regular member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s