Though polygamy is deplored by most societies today, its roots are admirable. The Bible stories of Hagar and Ruth illustrate the plight of women in ancient days. It was an extremely hard life. Women did not own property\ and were under the care of their fathers or husbands. So, what happened to widows who have no one to support them? What happened with their children? Where do they go? Enter the practice of Polygamy. If the man marries a woman, he has a legal responsibility to care for her. She has a right to receive sustenance and support and an inheritance should he die. Polygamy was the most practical way to care for widowed women and orphans. The woman would be married to the man of the house, so there would be no danger of breaking the Laws of Chastity. The woman would be cared for and, for her part, carry out responsibilities of the household.
ScottRFrazer.com
email to scottrfrazer@gmail.com
Episode #21 – The Admirable Roots of Polygamy
This is the podcast “Science and Scriptures, Season 1, episode #21 – The Admirable Roots of Polygamy
Hello everyone. This is Scott Frazer and welcome to another episode of the podcast Science and Scriptures. I knew that this podcast must eventually consider the topic of polygamy. But please don’t turn off the episode. This topic has been worn out by discussion, but I will follow my pledge to discuss the normally undiscussed sides of such topics. I wish to talk about the roots of polygamy. What was the reason God felt that polygamy was a principle that deserved to be restored with all the other principles restored by Joseph Smith? Many women wonder how God could be so chauvinistic.
Before joining the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the only thing I knew about the Mormons was that they lived in Utah and had practiced polygamy in the past. As everyone knows, it is still one of the church’s defining features. Since joining the church, I have heard a variety of explanations and apologies for the doctrine. For some church members, polygamy is simply an aspect of our church history that has been explained to the world countless times and should finally be left alone. For other church members, polygamy is a doctrine that still offends them deeply and is often give as a reason for leaving the Church. Critics of the church continues to use polygamy again and again as a club to attack Latter-day Saints beliefs.
To my female listeners, I realize that this topic generates anxiety, jealousy, and anger. For many years, my wife would not even discuss the subject! Why would the Lord have ever approved of the practice of polygamy? Most of the world believes it is an offensive practice that downgrades women. But when you look at the roots of the beginning of polygamy, maybe you will understand it in a new light.
First, one must realize that polygamy was a practice of the Old Testament. Abraham had two wives. Isaac had four wives, from which the 12 tribes of Israel arose.
In the podcast episode entitled, “Mistaken Assumptions in Judging Church History” I encouraged everyone to realize that we don’t live in 1840. I argued that historians have repeatedly pled that people not judge historical figures by today’s standards, a practice called Presentism. Today, I am going to ask you to realize you REALLY don’t live in 2000 BC, in the days of Abraham. Most of us should probably admit that we cannot really imagine the rules of life back then.
But a few Old Testament stories might help us to better understand the time. In Genesis 21, Sarah, the wife of Abraham, thinks she hears Hagar, the mother of Abraham’s son Ishmael, mocking her. Between this and her worry that Ishmael may compete with Isaac as heir, she tells Abraham to get rid of the woman.
“Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.” (Genesis 21: 10)
The fact that Sarah can tell Abraham to throw Hagar out of the camp – and probably to her death, may give you an idea of the value of women in ancient days.In verse 11, we learn that Abraham was grieved to have to do this to his son Ishmael! We read,
“And the thing was very grievous in Abraham’s sight because of his son.”
The Lord does tell Abraham that Hagar and Ishmael would be preserved and that Ishmael’s descendants would become a great nation. So Abraham could feel less guilty about the eviction. But Abraham does as he is told.
“And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed…” (Genesis 21: 14)
When the water is all gone, Hagar casts Ishmael under a bush and walks away because she doesn’t want to see him die.
Hagar has no tent, no food, and no support. She and her child are left to die in the wilderness. Many Christians turn away from the barbarism of such a story, but we need to face the facts of ancient times. There is no evidence that what Abraham did was an uncommon practice. The Lord saves Hagar (Abraham did not) and a great nation arises from her son Ishmael.
Now let’s consider the story of Ruth.
Ruth’s husband and his brother die, leaving Ruth and her mother-in-law Naomi without support. Ruth has nowhere to go and begs Naomi to let her go with her. They go to Bethlehem, where they start to glean barley and wheat from the remnants left after the harvesters have already been through the field. This was a form of welfare in these ancient days, established by the Mosaic Law, to provide for people who had no other source of food.It was grueling work for a few grains. But that was the best deal that Ruth could find.
Boaz sees Ruth in the fields and gives her some attention and grain. Ruth indicates her interest in Boaz and sleeps at his feet one night. Boaz buys a field of land owned by Naomi’s husband and sons – and with the transaction Ruth is purchased to be his wife!
“And Boaz said unto the elders, and unto all the people, Ye are witnesses this day, that I have bought all that was Elimelech’s, and all that was Chilion’s and Mahlon’s, of the hand of Naomi.
Moreover Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of Mahlon, have I purchased to be my wife”,
Please note in the book of Ruth that this is a Happy Ending for Ruth! There is no indication if Boaz had a first wife or not.We read that he does not consider himself to be a young man (Ruth 3:10), yet he appears to be successful. So there would be no reason for him to be a bachelor.The writer of the book of Ruth did not deem it important enough to mention if Boaz had a first wife or not.
These two stories illustrate the plight of women in ancient days. It was an extremely hard life. Women did not own land. Women working away from the home was not only discouraged – it was nonexistent. There were no government welfare programs. It was a day and age that if a woman was offended by her husband and walked away from her home – she could starve or die of exposure.
Especially during wars, which were plentiful in ancient days, there were often more women than men in the land. It was a dangerous time. Besides war casualties, men died from defending their homes and livestock from robbers and wild beasts. Granted, many women died in childbirth, but generally men had the shorter life expectancy. If a childless woman died from the plague, her husband would continue his job and find a new wife. If a childless man died from the plague, his wife had the one option of returning to live with her family – if any of them still lived.
However, we know that the Lord loves his daughters. We read in Jacob, chapter 2:
31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
33 For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.
So, what do you do with an excess of widows who have no one to support them? What do you do with their young children? Where do they go if they don’t have a male relative to care for them? There were no women’s shelters or soup kitchens. There were no jobs for single women. Women working outside of the home wouldn’t occur for a few thousand years.
Women could, of course, be kept as concubines, essentially mistresses. But then the kept woman would have no legal claim that the man care for her. She would have no rights to receive an inheritance for her or the children she had by him should the man die.
Enter the practice of Polygamy.
If the man marries a second wife, he has legal responsibility to care for her. She has a right to receive sustenance and support, and later an inheritance. Polygamy was the most practical way to care for widowed women and orphans. The woman would be married to the man of the house, so there would be no danger of breaking the Laws of Chastity. The woman would be cared for and, for her part, carry out responsibilities of the household.
This principle makes enough practical sense that it was incorporated into major religions. The Koran of the Islam religion ordains that a Muslim can marry up to four wives, but only if he can care for them all equally well. The Prophet Mohamed married many of his nine wives because they were war widows. AS mentioned the Israelites allowed polygamy in their Mosaic Law.
Polygamy actually gave women more choices in life. I have heard the following explanation, which may illustrate this idea.
Say there was a small remote village where lived 100 single women and 100 single men. As pairings usually go, the prettiest girl marries the best provider in the village. The marriages continue, as the girls pick out, court, and marry men who are good providers. Eventually, we come down to the last 5 single women, who have to choose between the five poorest providers in the village. These last 5 men are lazy, drunk, dirty, and likely abusive.
Does it make more sense for these last 5 women to marry these bottom-of-the-barrel men – or for them to seek to be second wives of one of the better providers in the village?Granted, second wives did not have the privileges of first wives. But then again, they would not have to live in poverty and squalor. How would you choose? What would you wish for these five women?
Thus for the first 4000 years of earth’s history, polygamy was a means for the societies of men to take care of God’s daughters. That was the original principle behind polygamy. As a father of two daughters, I can understand this principle. A father wants his sons to go out and conquer the world. But he wants his daughters to be protected, even in ancient societies that did not value women.
There is no report in the Old Testament how God provided a revelation on marriage. The institution of marriage was thought to have begun in 2000 BC, around the time of Abraham. We don’t have evidence that Abraham received the revelation. But we hear about polygamy very early in the scriptures. Even before the birth of Seth to Adam and Eve, we learn about Lamech, a near descendent of Cain, who took two wives named Adah and Zillah.
The Mosaic Law regulated the rules around polygamy. In Deuteronomy 21:15 we read about how the rights of the firstborn stay with the firstborn, even if he is born to a less favored wife.
In Deuteronomy 25:5, we read:
“If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her.”
Such an arrangement was really quite common. From this verse (and also from the story of Ruth), we learn that, when a man died, the family or kinsmen had the first responsibility of marrying and caring for his widow. So, the Sadducees asked Jesus a “What If” question, trying to show there was no resurrection. “What if”, they asked, “a man with six brothers married a woman and then died without having had children. She marries the second brother who also dies, so the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth brothers all marry her and dies as well. Who would she be married to in the resurrection?” It is apparent that polygamy was very common, and marrying your brother’s widow was standard practice.
Some of the great men of the Old Testament, held up as examples of righteousness and obedience to the Lord, came from polygamous families or created polygamous families of their own.
For example, a man named Elkanah had two wives, Peninnah, who had children, and Hannah, and who had no children. Hannah went to the prophet Eli for a blessing, which he gave her. It came to pass that Hannah conceived and bare a son, called Samuel, who became a prophet.
In the book of Judges, we read of the righteous king of Israel called Gideon who had threescore and ten sons, for he had many wives.
Abijah was a righteous king of Judah, whose life was chronicled in 2 Chronicles. In chapter 13, we read
“But Abijah waxed mighty, and married fourteen wives, and begat twenty and two sons, and sixteen daughters.”
What is noticeable in all of these references is the tone of the Old Testament reports that great prophets and kings had multiple wives. There is no judgment at all, nor indication that these men were doing anything wrong. Polygamy was an established and accepted part of the culture.
As civilizations developed, and widows and orphans could be better cared for by the government, the practice of polygamy was discontinued. As one might expect, monogamy became the law in the two earliest centers of civilization – Athens and Rome. It spread from there and, between 600-900 AD, monogamy became the established norm for marriages. Polygamy does not fit into our modern world. But those who demonize it perhaps don’t understand its history.
Today polygamy is still practiced across Africa and in parts of Asia, but polygamy is now more of a symbol of wealth and status. In most such societies, a large family is a source of pride, while a smaller one is a sign of failure and shame.
Speaking of polygamy being a symbol of wealth and status, let’s consider David and Solomon. In Jacob Chapter 2, the Lord tells us that
“Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.”
David and Solomon had corrupted the real purposes of polygamy. Some of their wives were princesses who were married as part of political treaties between Israel and foreign countries. None of these women needed to be protected, nor did David or Solomon need hundreds of children.
The purpose of this podcast episode is to point out that, originally, polygamy was a means to take care of widows, other single women, and orphans. Why would the Lord not approve of this principle? Before slipping back into the present-day abhorrence of polygamy, we should take a moment to appreciate that this was a practice that once cared for the most needy and dispossessed women of society.
Besides taking care of single women, widows and orphans, there was another reason for polygamy of course – to bear children. If you remember, Sarah only sent Hagar into Abraham’s tent when she decided she could bear no children of her own. In Genesis 16:2, we read,
“And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the Lord hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her. And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai.”
In the book of Jacob, the Lord again reinforces this second reason for polygamy. We read in Jacob 2,
27 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;
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.
If the Lord needs a particular, chosen people to grow in numbers, he will command it. We may not be comfortable with that reason, but again some of that inability is due to our modern way of thinking. We are used to being surrounded by millions of people. The thought that an entire people could be extinguished from the earth is unthinkable. But, such things happened in the past. In view of such a possibility, the future of an entire nation overshadowed the jealousies of some of its women.
As most church members know, Joseph Smith did not initiate polygamy. He only restored it, as he was commanded. We read in D&C 132:40.
“I am the Lord thy God, and I gave unto thee, my servant Joseph, an appointment, and restore all things.”
There can be little argument that Joseph did not handle the reintroduction of polygamy very well. He kept the news from Emma and from his brother Hyrum. Trying to keep the truth of polygamy secret, yet initiate it at the same time led to rumors and accusations, both within the church and outside of it. But this was really a lose/lose situation for the prophet Joseph.
He was commanded to restore an ordinance of marriage that had gone from an admirable concern for the welfare of women to a practice that was considered deplorable by society.
Polygamy was reintroduced and the church tried to practice it. But the restoration of polygamy caused a very difficult time in church history. As an organization, the church almost didn’t survive trying to live the principle.
In the days of Joseph Smith, did the Lord command the reintroduction of polygamy to provide for widows and orphans? I have heard the argument both ways, but this did not seem to be a driving force. Was the reintroduction to create greater membership for the restored church? In the few years it was in effect, polygamy did help the Saints to establish a larger population in the wilderness of Utah. Or was the reintroduction of polygamy a required part of the restoration of all Gospel principles? These are interesting questions, but the answers are a moot point.Polygamy was restored, as was the Lord’s wish. The church lived the restored principle, despite the difficulties. Then the government of the United States rejected the practice most forcefully. Some Church leaders fled to Mexico. Others were jailed. The Lord finally decided that the persecution had gone on long enough. He released the church from continuing to live the principle.
So, if I have not gotten myself in trouble with you in recounting the past, let me speculate about the future.I cannot imagine that polygamy will ever be needed again. Polygamy is a principle of ancient societies that provided a means to care for widows and orphans. It provided a means to increase the number of members of a particular family or nation.But today women have the freedom to be single and NOT be in danger for their lives. There is no need to create more children. Those who speculate that polygamy might be needed in the next life are REALLY, REALLY speculating – we have no data and no indications that such a thing is true. We don’t even know how children will come about there…
If you read the Old Testament, you will find many rules in the Mosaic Law and many concepts that are not practiced at all today. But, like polygamy, these practices did exist at one time - and the principles behind them are still valid. The Ten Commandments are still in effect. But things have changed. Few people struggle with the second commandment about not worshipping graven images anymore.Nevertheless, the principle behind that second commandment is still valid. Thus it was with polygamy. The original principle behind the practice, to protect and care for the daughters of God, is still valid. Yes, as men distorted polygamy into a symbol of success and power, it changed men’s, and especially women’s, view of the practice. But that change should not cause us to forget the original intent of the system.
In the end, it’s time to move on.All the concern, anxiety, and debate around polygamy over the past 178 years is enough. Polygamy was originally based on an admirable principle. As we entered the Last Dispensation, for whatever reason, it and other Gospel principles had to restored. But the need for polygamy is over, and I don’t expect to ever see it again.
That is all I have for you today. I hope this podcast episode helped you to understand the very misunderstood principle of polygamy. This is Scott Frazer of the podcast Science and Scriptures. Thanks for listening and take care.