The history of our world illustrates many examples of individuals and their insatiable desire for power. While it is not necessary to name specific individuals, I’m sure you can think of many, whether it be government, religious, or corporate leadership. Power and control are something so desired and sought after, that many of our most captivating books, movies and stories the common plot revolves around a villain’s request for power. It is a theme that often mirrors reality.
One story you may be familiar with is Harry Potter. It is a story of one young wizard’s struggle over the course of seven years with a villainous wizard named Voldemort. Voldemort was a powerful wizard that had gained many followers and terrorized the wizarding world. He killed Harry’s parents using a killing curse. Voldemort also attempted the killing curse on Harry, who at the time was a small child, just over a year old. To Voldemort’s surprise, the curse did not kill Harry. It somehow rebounded, leaving the evil wizard just a shell of his former powerful self.
Many years later, Harry attended a wizarding school called Hogwarts. He faced Voldemort there in his first year, and their struggle continued on the next several years.
It became evident that the fates of Harry Potter and Voldemort were tied. But if a killing curse cast on Harry rebounded on Voldemort, how was Voldemort not dead? How did Harry Harry also escape death?
In many stories, we see part of the quest for power is achieving immortality. This was paramount to Voldemort’s goals. Early on in his quest for power he started delving into forbidden magic. He learned of the concept of Horcruxes. A Horcrux is a dark magical object used to hide part of a wizard’s or witch’s soul. To create one, one must rip their soul apart by committing murder. Through ritual, the torn soul fragment is sealed into an object which makes the person immortal as long as the object exists. It goes without saying how horrific splitting your soul to create a horcrux would be considered. But, Voldemort’s desire for immortality was so great, he did the unthinkable. He split his soul seven times! He was without feeling, without morals, and any capacity to feel love.
Because of Voldemort’s state, the power or “magic” of love wasn’t something he considered. So when he cast a killing curse on Harry only for it to rebound? It was because Harry’s mother intervened putting herself between Harry and Voldemort. She sacrificed herself in an act of true love so her son could live. While we could explore this story further, the point remains: it was love and sacrifice that defeated Voldemort’s evil the first time, and for him to be defeated the final time, it would also require sacrifice.
So what does Polygamy have to do with Horcruxes and Harry Potter? As I reflected on this, I thought of the effect Polygamy has in the modern-day church. It is not practiced to the extent it was in the territorial Utah days. It was eventually rooted out under threat of excommunication in the 1930’s under Heber J. Grant’s tenure as president of the LDS church. It’s evil still lives on somehow. Perhaps it is because the modern temple ceremonies still have ties to polygamy. Polygamous sealings are still performed in the church today. Prime examples include Russell M. Nelson and Dallin H. Oaks. Not only is it doctrinal in the LDS church, but both men believe they will be polygamists in the next life, as they are sealed to multiple women.
Polygamist apologists within the church desperately seek scriptures in the accepted canon to defend and justify polygamy. One scripture that came to mind as I was contemplating this subject was Isaiah 4:1:
“And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.” (Isaiah 4:1, KJV)
In the words of Jesus, “Great are the words of Isaiah”, right? (3 Nephi 23:1). Jesus tells us to “search these things diligently”. When we use a scripture like Isaiah 4:1 to justify polygamy we must ask, What is the context? It appears at the very beginning of a chapter. When Isaiah made his records, he likely didn’t insert chapter breaks in his records. That was done later by translators and editors of the respective biblical editions. It’s not apparent how far forward or backward one needs to go to get the correct context. Consider the verse in isolation. Is there any dialogue from God in this verse? Any command from God? It seems to be giving narrative of what will happen. The only dialogue one can perceive is that of the “seven women”. What are they saying? They desire to take away their reproach. The word “reproach” is key. Years ago while studying, I sought a synonym for the word “reproach” to understand this verse better. At the time, I came across the word condemnation. The modern synonyms include words such as: disgrace, dishonor, scandal. Fair enough right? As you look further into context of this verse, in the prior chapter of Isaiah, you find narrative describing the “Daughters of Zion” in an unfavorable light.
Then there is the number seven. Seven Horcruxes. Voldemort. Immortality. Seven women taking hold of one man. Are the daughters of Zions willing to compromise, and split a portion of a husband, and share with other women, in order to take away their reproach? Their perceived condemnation, disgrace, dishonor, scandal? And is a man likewise willing to split his “love” seven ways to achieve the same? Or in other words, for eternal life?
Like splitting your soul in the story of Harry Potter is found only in darkness, splitting your love in polygamy breeds a similar darkness. Consider the words of Brigham Young:
“I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 3:247).
Adding some context to this quote does not bode favorably for Young’s words. If musing in a leadership meeting about lacking in love towards any of your wives to the point of being willing to commit murder isn’t dark enough, he proceeds to deny the atoning power of Jesus Christ. He states:
“There is not a man or woman, who violates the covenants made with their God, that will not be required to pay the debt. The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it“ (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 3:247).
Young’s premise is that the only way to reconcile to God after violating covenants with him, is by forfeiting your own life to pay the debt. Polygamy intertwined with the eternal marriage doctrine is one of those covenants he speaks of. If you were to reflect on teachings of your early childhood as you were preparing for baptism in the LDS church, you may remember the common teaching that a covenant in context of the church is defined as a two way promise made between an individual and God. The ritual of a marriage sealing in the temple implies that you are making a covenant with God. If God commanded against polygamy and adultery, rather than declaring it a doctrine of salvation, it is impossible to have a covenant of polygamy that involves him. Thus it is not a covenant. After a careful examination of Young’s words, you will find that living the doctrine of polygamy involves ritual, covenant, and reconciliation through bloodshed in exchange for the promise of eternal life, while denying the efficacy of the Atonement of Jesus Christ. This is eerily similar to the soul destroying witchcraft Voldemort used.
If you are a member of the LDS church, you hold to the doctrine of polygamy by virtue of the church’s accepted theology. You may have participated in rituals that were born to perpetuate polygamy. Leaders of the present day church claim succession and authority through Brigham Young who spent his church presidency advocating for the doctrine of polygamy as the means of salvation. In my first blog post, I shared a direct quote from Brigham Young stating as much. I’ll include it again here:
“Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned; and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given, and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 3:39)
Objectively, Polygamy is not a doctrine of God. It is a plurality of doctrines authored by Satan, and perpetuated through his servants. I challenge anyone to show me in a scriptural context where God commands Polygamy. It doesn’t exist. It is not Godly.
From a doctrinal standpoint, I think it is fair to address the most common scriptures used in apologetics. I have already addressed Isaiah 4. Another, perhaps the most common in LDS apologetics is 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.”
Where do I start? First, is polygamy even mentioned in this verse? Context, of course. Let me offer some. Jacob, the accepted spiritual authority after the death of his brother Nephi, comes to the temple. He then gives a discourse condemning polygamy in no uncertain terms. Some of the highlights include him speaking to the men, saying they have sinned in this practice, and have broken the hearts of their wives in it. Apologists use Jacob 2:30 as some sort of obscure loophole about needing polygamy to raise up seed. Is it really a thing for a Holy being such as God to command a people to break the hearts of their wives so they can raise up a “righteous” seed through…… Adultery? The logic doesn’t track. Before moving on from this absurd take on scripture, let me share one verse from Jacob’s sermon:
“Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them.“ (Jacob 3:5, LDS Edition)
LDS folk, you know the other Christians, whom you “hate” because they do not have the “fullness of” or the “restored” gospel? They are more righteous than you. They have not forgotten the commandment given to them by their Father, “Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14). A commandment, which happens to be the seventh of the ten commandments given. This scripture issues a strong condemnation of polygamy in any form. You might be surprised to learn that this specific verse as it stands now in the LDS edition of the scriptures is not in its original form. The original 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon stated “which was given unto our fathers“. Fathers as in plural, not singular as it is now. Polygamy apologists would point to this scripture in the singular as a reference that it was a commandment specific to Lehi, and posterity. The original version indicates, it is a commandment for all their fathers. A commandment for all of time. This was in every edition of the LDS Book of Mormon up until the edition that released in the 1980’s which removed the “s” and made it singular.
I’m going to address one more scripture that is used in polygamy apologetics. This is a big one, and perhaps obvious to the reader. The whole of Doctrine and Covenants Section 132 in the modern LDS edition of the Doctrine and Covenants. Surely, if anyone like me still believes the core of early Mormon teachings, revelations, and doctrines, this would be checkmate in the argument of Polygamy is not of God or doctrinal, right? This is considered LDS canon. I mean, this is as the section heading says: “Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded July 12, 1843“, right? Actually, in its present form, not very likely. The section you know as Section 132 was brought forth by the LDS church at a special conference held in August 1852 to announce to the church the practice of polygamy(Journal of Discourses 1:9). This was eight years after the death of Joseph Smith. The section heading refers to a revelation received on that date, but it is impossible to confirm that Section 132 (in it’s present form) was the actual revelation received on that date. Mainstream narratives of Section 132’s origination are riddled in claims that don’t track. For example, William Clayton claims that he wrote the revelation as Joseph Smith dictated, and that he, Joseph Smith, and Hyrum Smith were the only ones present. However, the revelation that was produced by Brigham Young at this conference was in Joseph Kingsbury’s handwriting (this is easily confirmed by the Joseph Smith Papers Project). I’m not a historian, nor is it my intent to debate historical matters. My intent in sharing the origins of the section is an effort to provide context, like the other scriptures that have been addressed. From a contextual standpoint, Section 132 finds very little credibility in that it is virtually an unknown in Mormonism prior to 1852. Joseph Smith certainly did not use it as a reference ever in any public or private teachings.
Back to the theological arguments surrounding Section 132. Let’s go directly to the text from the beginning:
“Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that 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 and concubines” (Doctrine and Covenants 132:1, LDS Edition)
Let’s first address the obvious. Isaac is mentioned here in the first verse. Nowhere in the biblical record is Isaac mentioned taking additional wives. The Bible also doesn’t explicitly state that Moses took plural wives. It could be argued just as confidently that Moses’ first wife died and he was remarried. David and Solomon? They were kings of Israel, very much flawed, especially after taking additional wives. One fruit of David’s polygamy was arranging for the murder of Uriah to satisfy his lust (See 2 Samuel ch. 11). Calling them “servants” is quite the stretch. In The Book of Mormon, Jacob 2:23-24 specifically condemns what David and Solomon practiced. In fact, it condemns using David and Solomon as a basis for committing whoredoms such as polygamy:
“But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.“
Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.“
Section 132’s premise is exactly what the Book of Mormon condemns. So what about Abraham and Jacob? The biblical record does indicate polygamist structure in their respective lives. An apologist would argue that with how blessed these men were of the Lord, that he certainly didn’t mind their involvement in polygamy. Of course, if I requested anyone to show me anywhere in the scripture record where they were commanded to practice polygamy, there wouldn’t be any command from the Lord. I’ll be first to admit, I don’t have all the answers regarding Abraham and Jacob’s relationship with polygamy. One thing given the scriptures before us, I can deduce that neither were commanded by God to live it. We can explore the context of their lives a little more. With Abraham, I’d like to first point out that we do have the record of The Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. This record assumed to be a more clean record than the biblical record in Mormonism, has no mention of Hagar. This gives me a little pause. Regardless, in the biblical narrative, Abraham had a wife and child that he valued more than Hagar and Ishmael, another key in discovering what the fruits of polygamy are.
The Old Testament is correctly named, in that it is very old. My experience has taught me that there is a fine line between literal historical vs. allegorical in the Old Testament. Which leads me to consider the literal vs. the allegorical with Jacob’s story. Jacob’s life story is rooted in trickery. The meaning of his literal name is “supplanter”. Through trickery he took the birthright from his twin brother Esau. Did Isaac and Rebekah literally name him “supplanter” if they didn’t know what would happen with the birthright in the future? Or is the name “Jacob” part of an allegory to teach us a lesson? Jacob eventually finds Rachel, and works seven years for her father in hopes to marry her, only to be tricked into marrying Leah. Leah supplanted Rachel in marrying Jacob first in some form of karma or irony. Upon this trickery, he works another seven years and then marries Rachel. According to the narrative, this would make him a polygamist. Let’s consider the fruits of this polygamy. Jacob ends up having twelve sons collectively with his wives. What follows is generations of contention. Jacob favored Joseph, the son of his favorite wife, leading to some of Joseph’s brothers wanting to kill him. Jacob was splitting his love amongst his wives and children disproportionately. Whether literal or allegorical, the portion of the story that contains polygamy is lacking in good fruit.
Section 132 echos Brigham Young’s words that polygamy is necessary for salvation. The following passage not only claims the necessity of polygamy, but that it predates this earth:
“For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.
For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide the law which was appointed for that blessing, and the conditions thereof, as were instituted from before the foundation of the world.“ (Doctrine and Covenants 132: 4-5, LDS Edition)
This passage claims the doctrine of polygamy is eternal in nature. It was a principle before the foundation of the world and will continue into the eternities. We find “saith the Lord” in the beginning of this section. Theologically, this section is dictated by God. God took seven days for the creation. God created Adam and Eve. They were commanded to multiply and replenish the earth(Genesis 1:28, KJV). Seems as though God wanted Adam and Eve to raise up a righteous seed. Certainly, if polygamy was instituted before the foundation of the world, and it is okay when needed to raise up a righteous seed, this would have been the ideal time to institute the practice. Yet, there was only Adam and Eve, and they were to be “one flesh”(Genesis 2:24, KJV) . During Jesus’ lifetime, he was also questioned by the Pharisees about marriage. Perhaps they were trying to trick him, or make marriage itself seem more nuanced in order to excuse their own behaviors, but Jesus reiterated the concept of marriage partners, being one flesh, yet a little more clearly:
“But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (Mark 10:6-9, KJV)
First, notice has Jesus used the terms “male” and “female” in singular context? Next, he used the word “twain” meaning two people, becoming one flesh, in unity. From the words of Jesus, there is no room for soul-splitting polygamy, but rather an encouragement of two individuals that truly love each other to become united, and to support and care for one another. This is love. It is not possible with polygamy.
Men in their quest for power have used polygamy as a means to exert their power. They are willing to divide their soul among multiple women to gratify their lusts, and exercise control over them. They give into the temptations of Satan and institute rituals under the guise or promise of salvation and eternal life. Women who participate in polygamy also have to live in a soul-splitting hell of knowing their “husband” can never fully love them, and be one flesh united with them. For what? The promise of eternal life.
Brigham Young during his presidency of the church emphasized his own doctrine of “Priesthood Keys” as his claim to power. He was the man with power in the church, and his keys allowed him to do whatever he saw fit. This also centered on polygamy, his priesthood keys would seal multiple women for him to have in the afterlife. This is in stark contrast to the teachings of the priesthood that was revealed to Joseph Smith:
“That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness. That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.” (Doctrine and Covenants 121: 36-37, LDS Edition)
If a man is satisfying his lusts under the guise of “priesthood keys”, and using the teaching of the priesthood to justify his actions, or to exert control over you or anyone else, He has no priesthood. I urge anyone actively involved in the LDS church that may be suffering in silence as the doctrine of polygamy and its history hangs over you in contemplation of eternal life – to turn to our Savior Jesus Christ and ask for deliverance from this soul-splitting curse that plagued our ancestors and those in the present day.
Satan always counterfeits true doctrine. Seven, in Christianity is traditionally symbolic of wholeness or completeness. God took seven days for the Creation of Earth. It was good. It was whole. He then commanded man and woman, two individuals to become one flesh or to become one whole. Satan’s dark doctrine would cunningly convince some that in order to be whole, a man needs to split his soul among seven women, for both man and woman to be saved eternally.
In the end Voldemort was defeated by acts of true love, and sacrifice. Jesus Christ loves you, and made the ultimate sacrifice for you to defeat any curse. He will not require you to split your soul in polygamy to gain immortality but through him, you can be whole.
Plurality of Doctrines 
One Reply to “”