And as much as Isaac is a symobol of the Christ, so too is Abraham a symbol of God, and Sarah a symbol of the Handmaid of God.

v. 30 has to be talking about polygamy one way or another.

“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 “shall” is imperative, then the Jacob is reiterating the monogamy imperative–”these things”–given in preceding verses. Since monogamy fits under the otherwise clause, then its opposite, polygamy, is associated with the prerogative to “raise up seed” through polygamy. The purpose of the Levirate law was to raise up seed for one’s dead brother (and by extension to the Lord as Israel was God’s covenant people.) Verse 30 does seem to be a reference to Levirate marriage. Jacob knew that the Law of Moses commanded polygamy in certain exceptional situations and needed to have his bases covered should his opponents launch another scripture-based article about a prior divinely-mandated exception that required polygamy.

If the shall in v. 30 is predictive (which I dispute) the prediction would then signify abominable polygamous practices as “these things.” Either way polygamy makes its appearance in v. 30.

I can give you some points for the creative reading of the Book of Mormon text.

I would like to explain why some of your ideas are non-starters, though.

1. Nowhere in the Book of Mormon or Bible does it show that the land of Jerusalem was cursed for any reason, especially not because during David and Solomon’s reigns. These kings were responsible for leading Israel into its golden era and predated Lehi by several centuries.

2. The curse on “this land” refers to the promised land arrived at by the Lehite colony and was fungible with wherever the Nephites relocated. Because this land is distinct from Jerusalem, I think Jacob is relaying some original revelation that he received as well as appealing to Lehi’s revelation as well.

3. The most likely time when Lehi received a revelation on marriage is when his sons were sent back to rescue Ismael’s daughters from a fate of joining polygamous Babylonian harems. The promise of monogamous marriage made for a good sales pitch in comparison to the lascivious Jerusalem practices and prophesied destruction.

4. The land of Jerusalem was practicing Levirate marriage as commanded by Moses at the time prior to Lehi’s exile. It would take considerable prophetic gravitas to overturn the precedent set by Moses. Levirate marriages would have been at an all time high as men were killed in wars to maintain Israel’s sovereignty. Yet we don’t see Lehi or any other prophet calling Jerusalem to repentance away from that practice. There were much bigger abominations going on that occasioned prophetic jeremiads.

Here’s my reading of Jacob 2:24-33

So, how you address the points #1-3 in the original blog post? From what I can see, you’ve just reiterated the RLDS reading.

How do you account for those points I raised?

Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines which
thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

Behold…an abomination occurred and the land of Jerusaleum was cursed.

Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the
land of Jersulalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto
me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.

Thus….Because the land of Jersuleum was cursed by the abominations commited by David and Solomon, God had to take his people to a new land to raise up a righteous seed.

Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like
unto them of old.

Therefore…Because God went to all the efforts of leading this people to a new land, he will not suffer that this effort was in vain, and that this new land will be cursed, too.

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;

Therefore….it is imperative that the people keep His commandments; one wife for each man, and no concubines.

For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms
are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.

Because…anything other than one wife and one husband is an abomination.

Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of
Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.

And…if the people do not hearken unto Gods commandment, then this land will be cursed like Jersuleum was.

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.

And, if God went to all the trouble of leading this people out of Jersuleum to raise up seed unto himself (refer back to Jacob 2:25), than He WILL command (and warn) them to correct their behavior; and whose to say he can’t command another “Lehi” to separate himself from this people, Land be cursed, and take this new “Lehi” to a new land that is’nt cursed. So, the people should hearken unto the threat that the LAND WILL BE CURSED.

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.

Here, Jacob rehashes what is said from Jacob 2:24-2:30 in Jacob 2:31-2:33, only he gives it more color this go around (or tries to Spell it out): Look Again…God saw his daughters led into captivity in the Land of Jersuleum.

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.

And… God does’nt want to see what happened in Jerusalem happen again, especially since he went to all the trouble of leading this people to this new land.

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.

Therefore…God warns again (reiterating Jacob 2:29, 2:30) and is more thorough in his explanation of what will happen to this people; that if they lead his daughters into captivity by commiting whoredoms (plural wives and/or concubines), then they will be cursed…AND destroyed. For God will not have them do like David and Solomon. And the part about destruction hints again at the idea that God will just take up another “Lehi.”

Other than Eliza Snow, and Louisa Beaman they have not presented their case against the wive’s.

Louisa Beaman underwent a re-baptism after her marriage to Joseph Smith. They assume that meant she committed some kind of sin. That’s possible, but it’s more likely to me she was renewing her covenant. Re-baptism’s were done for reason’s more than a person losing membership and needing re-baptized.

I know she never bore Joseph Smith a child. But rather than seeing that as firm evidence she was not married to him i take it they were not close. I know Joseh Noble alleged a honey-moon for Joseph Smith and Louisa Beaman. That may, or may not be true, but i doubt they saw each other much if ever in private after the ceremony.

I would like to know if the original copy of what became D.&C. 132 exist’s. A quick reading of the original copy would settle RLDS concern’s it was altered. Jame’s Whitehead said he briefly saw it at Winter Quarter’s and that the later LDS D.&C. version was altered. He said it was altered to sanction polygamy in the modern time’s.

Pamela Price did not say document’s like William Clayton’s journal was altered or a fake. I think they probably privately think that’s possible. All she told me in her e-mail was a wise i have not made an in-depth study of them, so she could not comment on them at the time. Her answer i took as meaning she was not unaware of the fact they implicated Joseph Smith in polygamy. I am quite sure both her and Richard Price have read the quote’s. I know they have read book’s like Mormon Enigma which cite from them.

While i like Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy i have my own more cautious approach to the subject. I really don’t want to comment on the content of the book and article’s much more than that. I agree and disagree with them some. It’s easy to get off track with an extended discussion of the history of Mormon polygamy.

I will try and limit my comment’s to Jacob 2:30 if i have any to make. So if anybody replie’s to me i will read and not respond. Unless of course i feel my comment’s will not get in the way of the topic at hand.

When I was responding to Bradley’s arguments, his assertion was that shall is always predictive when used in third person. If you think about it most of the commandment giving formulas employ some form of second person, like “thou shalt” or “ye shall.”

So even though the shalls in verse 27 and 29 are imperative, Bradley argued that the one in verse 30 can not be due to grammatical rules set up by the Oxford English Dictionary.

However I don’t think we should approach the Book of Mormon text with the idea that Joseph Smith tightly used advanced grammar rules. I think it is justified to use a third person imperative if you are talking about what command you would give to a group of people that does not include your current audience.