How can a minute detail be in harmony with the law but not an amplification of it?

If it was (past tense) a sin to practice them what changed that it was now (present tense) okay for God to give them direction in how to practice them?

However, what is still not clear to me is if you believe it was a sin to practice such things in accordance with God's law. I assume your answer is, no

M: How can a minute detail be in harmony with the law but not an amplification of it?

R: For instance, do you consider that the following command is an amplification of God's moral law?

Leviticus 21:5 They shall not make any bald place on their heads, nor shall they shave the edges of their beards nor make any cuttings in their flesh.

M: If it was (past tense) a sin to practice them what changed that it was now (present tense) okay for God to give them direction in how to practice them?

R: As Teresa said, God meets us where we are. Suppose a polygamous man in Africa joins the church. Don't you think some rules can be added to regulate his conduct? For instance, suppose a hypothetical rule says that if he keeps all his wives he should provide for all of them. Is this rule sanctioning his polygamy?

M: However, what is still not clear to me is if you believe it was a sin to practice such things in accordance with God's law. I assume your answer is, no.

R: No, my answer is yes, it was a sin, although it was a sin of ignorance.

Are there not ordained laws in the Bible directing the practice of polygamy? If so, then we need not discuss hypothetical cases, right? Where in the Bible do you get the impression that the laws directing the practice of polygamy were temporary?

M: However, what is still not clear to me is if you believe it was a sin to practice such things in accordance with God's law. I assume your answer is, no.


Do you have inspired support to back up this idea? I have never read in the Bible or the SOP where God gave the COI laws directing them in the practice of sin.

He finally fell into the common practice of other kings around him, of having a plurality of wives, and his life was embittered by the evil results of polygamy. His first wrong was in taking more than one wife, thus departing from God's wise arrangement. This departure from right prepared the way for greater errors. The kingly idolatrous nations considered it an addition to their honor and dignity to have many wives, and David regarded it an honor to his throne to possess several wives. But he was made to see the wretched evil of such a course by the unhappy discord, rivalry, and jealousy among his numerous wives and children. {TSB 93.3}

Teresa, yes, polygamy was not God's original plan for marriage. Nor was it His idea will even though He gave the COI direction in how to practice it. But to say polygamy is a sin because it inevitably results in bad homes and marriages overlooks the fact the same things have been observed in monogamous homes and marriages. Not saying you are saying this. Whether or not bigamy or polygamy ends in bad homes and marriages depends of the people involved and why they've adopted it. In those cases where it was preferable to the alternative (destitution or prostitution) I'm quite certain God was able to bless them with happiness. In such cases it seems hardly fair or kind to criticize it as a "heinous sin".

This terrible evil ..{CC 72.2

Polygamy had become so widespread that it had ceased to be regarded as a sin, but it was no less a violation of the law of God, and was fatal to the sacredness and peace of the family relation. . . . {CTr 82.2}

M:Do you have inspired support to back up this idea? I have never read in the Bible or the SOP where God gave the COI laws directing them in the practice of sin.

God gave the COI laws directing them in the practice of sin.

Exodus
21:10 If he take him another [wife]; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.

Deuteronomy
21:15 If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, [both] the beloved and the hated; and [if] the firstborn son be hers that was hated:
21:16 Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit [that] which he hath, [that] he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, [which is indeed] the firstborn:
21:17 But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated [for] the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he [is] the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn [is] his.

Deuteronomy
25:5 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.
25:6 And it shall be, [that] the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother [which is] dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.
25:7 And if the man like not to take his brother's wife, then let his brother's wife go up to the gate unto the elders, and say, My husband's brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel, he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother.
25:8 Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak unto him: and [if] he stand [to it], and say, I like not to take her;
25:9 Then shall his brother's wife come unto him in the presence of the elders, and loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face, and shall answer and say, So shall it be done unto that man that will not build up his brother's house.
25:10 And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.

Matthew
22:23 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,
22:24 Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
22:25 Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother:
22:26 Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh.
22:27 And last of all the woman died also.
22:28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.