While the social problems of wealth and the topic of polygamy may seem to be very separate items, they are nevertheless correlated problems. Polygamy is an expensive proposition, and the wealth of the Nephites is a prerequisite to the ability to support multiple wives in a household. Thus the increasing wealth of the Nephites causes problems both in the social stratification that has come from pride, but also from some of the other “trappings” of the rich - a household of multiple wives.
What is most interesting in Jacob’s discourse against polygamy is that the terminology he uses to condemn the practice is problematic. While he is certainly talking about polygyny (having more than one wife) he uses terms that would suggest that what is happening has no justification. As an Old Word Jew, even though one who spent no time in Jerusalem, Jacob nevertheless is familiar with the brass plates and the multiple stories of the polygyny of the patriarchs. In spite of this, Jacob’s language is strongly condemnatory. There is a subplot in this text that must be discovered.
Jacob introduces the Nephite men’s “grosser crime” as committing whoredoms. Jacob notes that the men are justifying their whoredoms by an appeal to David and Solomon.
Taking the terms at their face value creates an interesting problem. Whoredom is a particular classification of sexual activity. Obviously all sexual activity is not a whoredom, so in what context would we find it? The easiest way to define it is to look at where the term would clearly not apply, and that is to the context or marriage. A man and woman married to each other do not commit whoredom with each other. It can’t happen. There is a definition involved which provides moral and legal sanctity to sexual acts performed inside a marriage. The most confusing aspect of Jacob’s discourse will be this odd contradiction of definitions, where Jacob uses whoredom as a description of the same relationship for which he uses wife, a situation that should not exist.
While we certainly understand that marriages may be sanctioned by the Lord, they are also a political/legal definition. Thus any marriage that carries the political or legal sanction defines the actions of those involved to be legal, and therefore outside of the realm of “whoredom.” The definition of whoredom is therefore completely dependent upon the definition of marriage, because it refers to sexual activity outside of those defined bounds.
This becomes most interesting because the term “whoredom” is applied to David and Solomon. While they did indeed have many partners, they had many legal partners. Those legal partners could not fall under the designation of whoredom, so what could this possibly mean?
As a working proposition, there are two hypotheses. One is that even the legal sanction fails in the sight of the Lord once we exceed one man and one woman. The second is that something in the particulars of the marriages of David and Solomon created the condition of whoredom, but that reason would not have applied to all of the legal wives.
The first hypothesis is hard to hold in the light of verse 30 below (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). Thus the number of wives can’t be the inherent problem.
The second is still problematic because according to the laws of the time, David and Solomon did have legal wives. Still, there are complications with both David and Solomon that came from their desires for wives. David fell over Bathsheba, and Solomon‘s involvement with his foreign wives was also contrary to God’s desires. Thus for both David and Solomon, while there were legal definitions that placed their wives and concubines in officially sanctioned categories, there were moral indiscretions that perhaps withheld God’s sanction from those marriages. Thus they might have been married before mortal law, but in those cases, not married before eternal deity.