Has Warren Jeffs turned his trial into a sermon on polygamy?

Plenty of polygamous marriages in the Old times weren’t condemned by God, as far as I am concerned.

Many were not. That doesn't mean many others weren't. Solomon was thus condemned (1 Kings 11:1-13). And then Solomon was referenced as a negative poster boy for same thing in Nehemiah 13:25-27...where Nehemiah says in v. 26 that Solomon "sinned."

Yes, the primary sin was the intro of idolatry into Jewish culture by foreign women; but that doesn't mean the Lord failed to see that coming thru the portal of polygamy. Deut. 17:17 shows he saw that polygamy specifically would divide the heart of its practitioners.

Besides, if we went with your logic, that we didn't see God condemn Hosea for marrying a practicing prostitute, then would that be deemed implied consent from God? What about prophets of God in the OT who were told to appear naked publicly? Does that imply consent from God that exhibitionism is a-OK?

Plenty of polygamous marriages in the Old times weren’t condemned by God, as far as I am concerned. Culture changed, however, and so should general practices. However, I am not in any way sympathetic to it now, because of the fact that it operates in defiance to the law(s) and a whole lot more than just plural marriage, such as statuatory rape, kicking out the lost boys, etc. Again, there are many reasons not to legalize it now in modern culture, but there’s no need at the same time to try being some purist about it.

What really changed about monogamy from Genesis to Jesus' elaboration in Matthew 19?

Jesus, referencing Genesis: "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So THEY ARE NO LONGER TWO, BUT ONE. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." (Jesus, Matthew 19:4-6)

We see that Jesus says marriage was intended from the beginning to be the 2-becoming-1.

According to your superimposed overlay upon Jesus' words, here, please explain that if God sanctioned polygamy how could 3 or 4 or 5 become 1 flesh? How could sister "wives" to the same man become a single flesh with one another? (You're not touting the lesbian line that women become single flesh with one another are you?)

Let's face it: BOTH OT polygamy AND Mormon polygamy militated against oneness in every sense of the word.

We saw this with all the in-fighting and jealousy in the household of Jacob (Genesis); and it continued in the Mormon era.

For more on Jacob, see my next post.

Re: highlighting of Jacob as some kind of exemplar (re: your suggestion that God didn't condemn Jacob)

#1 I didn't know that the OT was a complete catalogue of God's condemnation of each person's individual sins!

The Bible calls a person who is divorced (beyond things like victimized by spousal adultery) & remarries as continuing to commit adultery. Yet I don't think we have it anywhere in Scripture where you can find "textual examples of him throwing out his" [second, third, or 4th serial] wives, or God asking" such a biblical character "to repent of his other marriages" do you?

What? Are you telling us NONE of the Biblical characters ever divorced a wife for no good reason?

#2 Although you've made some references to the culture of Jacob's time, you're still not fully "getting it" -- re: what it was like to be a non-virgin single or divorced woman in that culture. The fact is simple: After the marriage night, Leah was no longer a virgin.

Consummation-wise, Jacob was "married" to Leah after the first night. Betrothal-wise -- which was as good as married in Jewish culture -- Rachel was "married" even before the first bridal night. Jacob would have either had to "divorce" Leah -- or by technicality -- claim he was never married to her. Or skip out on his betrothal commitment to Rachel. Dumping Leah would have been deemed as "damaged goods" and perhaps remained unmarriage-able.

#3 As for the servant girls, note that
(a) they didn't necessarily have the same "bridal week" both Leah & Rachel had with Jacob (Gen. 29:27)...in that sense, they were concubines vs. brides.
(b) Yes, Gen. 30:4,9 claim these servants were "wives" -- but "wives" by whose authority? (Their masters, Rachel and Leah). A parallel would be for a woman who ran a plantation with her husband in 19th century America to give a slave woman to her husband as a "wive." Tell us, Morpheus, on what grounds would a slave have any rights to tell the woman of the house "no?"

* Slaves & concubines had no "rights" to say "no." So we're not talking about any relationships done in their authority or initiative.
* God didn't direct polygamy, so we're not talking about any relationships done in His authority or initiative.
* Jacob (& Abraham, too) didn't initiate sleeping with anybody besides their betrothed; so we're not talking about any relationships done in their authority or initiative.

The bottom-line Q then becomes: What authority did Rachel, Leah (& Hagar) have to give their servants to their husbands as "wives?" (Answer: None)

#4 Finally, to hear you tell it, since God didn't condemn Leah & Rachel's "gigolo" reductionism of Jacob, that's OK, too, eh? I mean, what, Morpheus...if you're married...'tis OK to buy sex-time with your wife just 'cause we have an OT precedent that God didn't openly condemn?

Gen. 30: 15 But she said to her, “Wasn’t it enough that you took away my husband? Will you take my son’s mandrakes too?” “Very well,” Rachel said, “he can sleep with you tonight in return for your son’s mandrakes.” 16 So when Jacob came in from the fields that evening, Leah went out to meet him. “You must sleep with me,” she said. “I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” So he slept with her that night. (vv. 15-16)

If you somehow think that gigolo-ism is a semi-sanctioned OT model within alternative-sleeping-arrangement households just because the above incident isn't specifically condemned in the OT by God, then, by all means, just say so.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.