In reading and listening to others about Polygamy in the LDS Church I can't come up with any rational or reasonable reason it was practiced.
As a commandment it falls off when we see Joseph Smith starting the practice before he has the authority to do so.

The excuse of 'too many women' falls apart when one looks at the population figures.

Was there any rational and reasonable reason for polygamy as practiced by the early LDS?

Yep!



Joseph Smith started polygamy for the exact same reason other powerful cult/religious leaders did/do.

Seems powerful religious/cult leaders get away with all sorts of otherwise hurtful, inappropriate, even cruel sexual behavior if they use the "God said" excuse.

~td~

Short answer: No.

Long answer: No matter how apologists spin it, the answer is still No.

Yes, Mormonism attracted more women than men. I read recently I believe it was from Brigham Young where he commented on that fact, unfortunately I don't remember where I read it and can't quote. So if that's the case, that Mormonism would appeal and attract women much easier than men, it makes sense to practice polygamy.

Only if you're an alpha male who is determined to marginalize women while at the same time lording it over lesser males.

And the answer is still No, marg. And when Joseph started polygamy, there was no overabundance of women... he mostly married married women and teenage girls, not single adult women.

I am positive I read and I'm pretty sure it was Brigham Young say that more women have an interest in Mormonism than men. Joseph didn't practice polygamy, Joseph practiced sex. However my point still stands because he likely realized that it is easier to convert women than men. A successful man at converting can simply marry the women, or marry recent converts of others.

Well given that "rational argument", why don't the CEOs of General Growth Properties and Simon Properties (the two largest developers of shopping malls) practice polygamy???

What am I missing?

This is from wiki pedia on Brigham Young but this is not where I read it, I read something which Brigham Young wrote which indicated this.

Hey, let's not fail to cover it all. Could it be that penis size had something to do with who could have extra wives? The larger the organ the more wives you get? No, just kidding!



Or more so, how about it was needful that the restoration of all things was prophesied long ago and the law of plural marriage had to be established in latter days to fullfill all things that pertain to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

The house of Israel was founded upon polygamy! It it is fitting that Latter-day Saints imitated this practice. The other Christian sects got caught with their pants down and failed to realize a restoration of all things was already written in the plan of God. had not the Mormons done it first the other religions would have tried it. But they were much too late.

Paul O

Hey Harmony,



Just to be clear... the reason I said "yes" (that there is a rational reason to explain polygamy) is because, it is rational to think that Joseph Smith started polygamy because he wanted young girls and women for his sexual pleasure.

What is not rational is to think that Joseph Smith was somehow completely different than all the other powerful men who exploit and use girls and women for their sexual pleasure.

~td~

quote="Joey"]

Well given that "rational argument", why don't the CEOs of General Growth Properties and Simon Properties (the two largest developers of shopping malls) practice polygamy???

What am I missing?[/quote]

I don't understand your argument.

One way of keeping recent female converts to Mormonism and have them stay within Mormonism is to marry them and keep them pregnant.

Brigham was a wannabe, a Johnny-come-lately. He was only following in Joseph's footsteps. Joseph started it without authority and without blessing, putting words in God's mouth. And every reason given for why he died when he died is rooted in polygamy.

The answer is still No. Try reading a bit more than wiki, marg.

He's saying the CEO's of GGP and Simon Properties should be practicing polygamy (which they may be, in the form of serial divorce, for all I know), if you think polygamy is ever rational.

Matt Ridley?

Horse pucky. Christ fulfilled the Law... all of it. The ancient Isrealites had a lot of other nondoctrinal cultural practices that weren't restored, so that argument is really lame and easily punctured.

C'mon, Paul. You can do better than that.

Harmony,

Christ fulfilled the Law of Moses – the various rites, ordinances, and rituals that pertain to sacrifice. You know as well as I do that blessed plural marriage was before the law of Moses. There are no teachings in the scriptures that say Christ fulfilled (done away) the law of marriage as practiced by the ancients, notably, Abraham.

Did I do better that time?



Paul O

That is irrelevant.




Again irrelevant.

The fact is B.Y. appreciated that Mormonism attracted more women. I'm sure J. Smith did as well. Even the early Christian church it was known attracted more women than men.



Who cares, that doesn't address anything I said.



Again irrelevant



Try trying to counter ...arguments made.

The point, marg, is that all discussions surrounding justifying polygamy start and end with Joseph, and have nothing to do with Brigham. Brigham was not even in the picture when polygamy was started. So bringing up anything Brigham said when discussing the justification for polygamy, which is this thread's subject, is both immaterial and off topic. Brigham was simply riding Joseph's coattails when he tried his own hand at justifying the restoration of the abomination.

If the topic is continuing polygamy, or expanding polygamy, or otherwise fiddling with polygamy, then you can bring up Brigham. But Brigham had nothing to do with the supposed restoration of polygamy, and thus is not part of the justification discussion.

Please try to keep up.

Marg,

Can you tell me what the difference is, that you believe, between Joseph Smith and Warren Jeffs when it came to polygamy????

God told us to do it.

Wait a minute....rituals pertaining to sacrifice were part of the Abrahamic covenant. God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son, Issac. He stopped him before the sacrifice was complete, stating that the exercise was an object lesson symbolizing the sacrifice of Christ.

Why would Christ's crucifixion and resurrection only fulfill a portion of Abraham's law?

This is where I have always found a HUGE disconnect. Take a look at the following scriptures, Paul:



Take a look at the cross-reference for law:



Why the blatant disconnect? This, coupled with the graphic details of how the hearts of God's daughters were broken by polygamy in Jacob 2 leads me to believe that there has been some gross misrepresentation concerning polygamy from the beginning.