The Bible and Polygamy: Does the Bible Sanction Polygamy?

In Short

This volume preserves the proceedings of a three-day debate held in Salt Lake City in 1870 between Rev. John Philip Newman, chaplain of the U.S. Senate, and Orson Pratt, one of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The text serves as a primary historical record of the theological tension between mainstream Protestant monogamy and Mormon plural marriage. Beyond the transcript of the debate itself, the book includes supplemental sermons from other church leaders, offering a comprehensive look at how these competing factions utilized scripture to justify their contradictory social orders.

The Story

The narrative begins with a diplomatic friction over a perceived public challenge. Dr. Newman, a prominent Methodist clergyman, writes to Brigham Young, eager to take up what he believes is an invitation to debate the biblical standing of polygamy. Young’s curt, formal reply denies that any such challenge originated from his office, clarifying that the newspaper in question was not under his control. Despite this initial misfire, the two parties arrange the event in the New Tabernacle, setting the stage for a dramatic public confrontation before an audience of thousands.

The debate is structured as a rigorous exercise in biblical interpretation. Professor Orson Pratt opens by grounding the Mormon position in the law of Moses, citing specific passages from Deuteronomy and Exodus that he argues provide explicit divine sanction for taking multiple wives. He frames the history of the patriarchs—Abraham, Gideon, and others—as evidence that polygamy was not merely a tolerated practice but a divinely ordained instrument for the multiplication of righteous offspring. Pratt links this to the concept of "celestial marriage," arguing that marriage is an eternal covenant designed to persist beyond death, a concept he claims has been lost to the monogamous world.

Dr. Newman counters with a strictly monogamous reading of the creation narrative. He argues that the pairing of Adam and Eve in Eden serves as the immutable, universal model for all humanity. Newman systematically addresses Pratt’s citations, attempting to recontextualize the lives of the patriarchs and the Mosaic laws as specific exceptions rather than general commands. He leans heavily on the teachings of Jesus and Paul, asserting that the New Testament effectively restored the original, pure design of one-man-one-woman marriage. As the debate progresses, the tone sharpens; Newman accuses his opponent of hypocrisy for not strictly following the very Mosaic laws he claims to defend, while Pratt pivots to critique the moral failures of monogamous civilizations, particularly the Roman Empire.

The final section of the book moves beyond the debate transcript to include sermons from George A. Smith, Orson Pratt, and George Q. Cannon. These post-debate reflections consolidate the Mormon argument, emphasizing that their practice is a restoration of ancient biblical holiness. They defend the institution not just through scripture, but as a defense against the perceived social corruption and prostitution endemic to "modern" monogamous societies. The volume concludes not with a resolution, but with a firm declaration of the Latter-day Saints’ belief that their practice is backed by divine authority and that it will ultimately prevail over the disapproval of the outside world.

How It Unfolds

The invitation is issued Dr. Newman attempts to force a public confrontation, but he finds himself stalled by a bureaucratic misunderstanding regarding the ownership of a local newspaper. The two sides eventually bypass this confusion to meet for a formal, three-day theological match in the New Tabernacle.

The scriptural opening Professor Pratt initiates the debate by meticulously citing the law of Moses, arguing that the Bible contains specific regulations for plural marriage. He establishes the framework that polygamy was a standard, authorized practice within ancient Israelite society.

The monogamous defense Dr. Newman pivots to the garden of Eden, asserting that the creation of one woman for one man is the governing law of marriage. He argues that subsequent scriptural references to polygamy are either misunderstood, misapplied, or instances of divine exception rather than rule.

The critique of corruption The arguments shift from textual analysis to historical and moral comparisons. The participants trade critiques of the other’s social order, contrasting the perceived order of the Mormon household with the alleged decline and moral rot of monogamous nations.

The final testimonies The book concludes with supplementary sermons from LDS leaders who reinforce the arguments made during the debate. These final entries frame the practice as an essential component of the "Holy Priesthood," positioning the church as a target of persecution for upholding divine laws.

The People

Orson Pratt acts as the primary intellectual defender of his faith. He is calm, deliberate, and deeply committed to a literal, legalistic reading of the Old Testament. He views the Bible as a record of divine commands that were intended to be followed through the ages, and he holds the memory of Joseph Smith as a touchstone for his own moral authority.

Dr. John Philip Newman represents the moral and religious consensus of the American East. He is articulate, sharp-tongued, and clearly frustrated by what he views as the subversion of the "Christian" marriage ideal. He treats the debate as an opportunity to expose what he considers a dangerous deviation from the path of righteousness, often using logic and philology to corner his opponent.

Brigham Young, though not a debater, looms over the text as the administrative force behind the Mormon cause. His brief, cool correspondence at the beginning illustrates his desire to maintain control over the public narrative of his church, refusing to be drawn into unnecessary squabbles while ensuring his representatives are well-prepared for the intellectual fray.

In Its Own Voice

Regarding the primary design of the marital union, Dr. Newman contrasts the Mormon view with his own understanding of the Garden of Eden:

"The union of two loving hearts is more than the union of two bodies."

Professor Pratt justifies the practice of plural marriage by pointing to the historical example of Gideon, arguing that the ability to father many children was a sign of divine blessing:

"A faithful, righteous, holy man, who takes, according to the great, divine institution of polygamy, a plurality of wives, is capable of multiplying his offspring ten or twenty-fold more than he could by one wife."

In his concluding remarks, George Q. Cannon asserts that the controversy is fundamentally about the difference between temporal and divine perspectives:

"We know that God can sustain us: He has borne off His people in triumph thus far and will continue to do so."

What It's Really About

At its core, this book explores the nature of religious authority and the tension between tradition and the modernizing state. It asks whether scripture is a static, binding legal document—as Pratt argues—or a collection of historical, typical examples that must be interpreted through the lens of a later, more "refined" moral standard, as Newman contends. Underlying the debate is a profound anxiety about the definition of the family unit, the role of the state in regulating private morality, and the question of how a religious minority defines its identity against the pressure of a dominant, hostile culture. It is a work about the limits of language and the difficulty of reaching consensus when two parties fundamentally disagree on what constitutes a "law" from God.

Why Read It Today

Readers interested in the history of the American West or the development of religious thought will find this volume invaluable. It is a time capsule of 19th-century intellectual combat, showing how deeply polarized the nation was regarding the definition of marriage. There is a distinct, rhythmic formality to the language of both debaters, reflecting the high-minded oratory style of the period.

However, the reader should be prepared for the dense, technical nature of the biblical arguments. The back-and-forth over Hebrew translations and the specifics of the Mosaic law can be exhausting, and the period attitudes toward gender and race are expressed with a bluntness that may be jarring to modern sensibilities. The debate is long and repetitive, as both men frequently circle back to the same passages of scripture. Yet, there is something humanizing about the exchange; despite the ideological chasm between them, the participants remain engaged in a structured, polite dialogue that feels worlds apart from modern partisan discourse. For those who want to understand the roots of the conflict between the U.S. government and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, this book offers a raw, unfiltered look at the arguments that once shook the foundations of the territory.