Raise Up Seed: Levirate Marriage

To further explore the meaning of “raise up seed,” it helps to know the Hebrew concept of PaRDeS, four levels of reading scripture. The Peshat is the plain, straightforward meaning. The Remez is the hint, the symbolic meaning. The Derash draws out moral lessons, often by comparison. The Sod is the hidden, mystical meaning. In this section I want to explore the Peshat.

In the Bible, “raise up seed” is the language of levirate marriage: “Go in unto thy brother’s wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.”¹ If Jacob 2:30 allows any exception to one wife, the plain reading points here, not to general polygamy.

There is much debate about whether God has ever commanded or sanctioned polygamy in the past. One area of discussion involves the biblical concept of the Levirate law, a practice outlined in the Old Testament. The Levirate law was not unique to Israel but was a common custom among many tribal communities. The name ‘Levirate’ doesn’t come from Levi, but from the Latin word ‘levir,’ meaning ‘brother-in-law.’ While this custom existed before the time of Moses, the Lord codified it into the law of Moses, giving it a formal place in Israelite society.²

This discussion is significant because the phrase ‘raise up seed,’ found in Jacob 2:30, is a phrase also used in the Bible. In biblical contexts, ‘raise up seed’ is most often associated with the Levirate law.³ This practice was designed to ensure that a deceased man’s family line continued by providing offspring through a close relative, often the deceased’s brother. Keeping a family’s name and inheritance alive mattered deeply in ancient Israel.

The Nephites kept the law of Moses, which included commandments, statutes, and judgments.⁴ The law encompassed many detailed instructions for daily life, and you can find a list of the 613 mitzvot (commandments) that make up the law with a simple online search.⁵ Among these is the Levirate law, as codified in Deuteronomy 25:5–10.

“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. 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. 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. 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; 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. And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.”⁶

One of the best succinct descriptions of the purpose of this law comes from Josephus, a Jewish historian. In his book series Antiquities of the Jews, written for a Greco-Roman audience, Josephus provides a thoughtful explanation of this Jewish custom and belief.

“If a woman’s husband die, and leave her without children, let his brother marry her; and let him call the son that is born to him by his brother’s name, and educate him as the heir of his inheritance: for this procedure will be for the benefit of the publick; because thereby families will not fail; and the estate will continue among the kindred; and this will be for the solace of wives under their affliction, that they are to be married to the next relations of their former husbands.”⁷

As I studied this topic, I made notes of my thoughts. Twice, I noted how the Lord is very protective of the widow. It became very clear to me that this is a recurring theme in scripture. Throughout the Bible, the Lord expresses His concern for widows and commands His people to care for them. For example, Exodus warns, “Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child.”⁸ Deuteronomy says the Lord “doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow.”⁹ The Psalms call God “a judge of the widows.”¹⁰ And Isaiah reminds Israel to “plead for the widow.”¹¹ These verses show that the Lord consistently emphasizes the importance of protecting and providing for widows, ensuring their welfare in both His laws and His teachings.

Main Points of the Levirate Covenant

• The woman must not marry a stranger (Deuteronomy 25:5).
• A brother of the deceased must take her as a wife (Deuteronomy 25:5).
• That brother must provide her with an heir to continue the family line (Deuteronomy 25:6).
• If the brother refuses, the widow looses his shoe and spits in his face as a public act of shame (Deuteronomy 25:9).
• His name becomes a byword in Israel, reflecting his refusal to fulfill his familial duty (Deuteronomy 25:10).

Key Observations About the Levirate Law

As I’ve studied the Levirate law and how it was applied, I noted several key points:

• Preserving the Family Name: The primary purpose was to ensure the continuation of a deceased man’s family line through an heir.
• Maintaining a Land of Inheritance: It helped preserve the inheritance within the family, ensuring that property stayed within tribal lines.
• Protecting Women: This law provided security for widows, preventing them from being abandoned or left destitute.
• Demonstrating the Lord’s Mercy: The law reflects the Lord’s deep concern and protection for widows, as seen in His broader commandments regarding their care (Exodus 22:22–24, Isaiah 1:17).
• Not Practiced by Latter-day Saints: Despite the importance of the Levirate law in ancient Israelite society, Latter-day Saints did not follow this law. They did not “raise up seed” in the way described in the Bible.

Judah and Tamar

The Bible gives us a few examples of this law. The first is from Genesis 38, where Tamar’s husband, Er, dies without having children.¹² Following the Levirate law, Tamar is given to Er’s brother, Onan, to produce offspring in Er’s name.¹³ However, Onan refuses to fulfill his duty, and God punishes him for his actions.¹⁴ Later, Tamar takes matters into her own hands to ensure the family line continues, resulting in the birth of Perez and Zerah.¹⁵

It should be noted that none of the scenarios in this Genesis story involve polygamy. Tamar’s first marriage to Er was clearly monogamous.¹⁶ When she was given to Onan as part of the Levirate law, this relationship also did not lead to polygamy, and nothing says Onan was already married.¹⁷ The promise of Shelah, Judah’s youngest son, would likewise have resulted in a monogamous relationship if it had been fulfilled.¹⁸ Lastly, Tamar’s encounter with Judah, though unconventional, did not result in a formal marriage.¹⁹ This example of Levirate marriage, or the practice of “raising up seed,” demonstrates that the principle was focused on continuing a family line, not on promoting or involving polygamy.

This story indicates that the “spirit of the law” was fulfilled, even if not the “letter of the law.” Judah himself declared, “She hath been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son.”²⁰ What mattered most was the heir and the widow, more than the letter of the law.

Ruth and Boaz

The story of Ruth and Boaz, found in the Book of Ruth, provides another example of the principle of “raising up seed.” Though not a strict application of the Levirate law, the story reflects the same purpose: ensuring the continuation of a family line and protecting the rights of a widow. Ruth, a Moabite widow, and her mother-in-law, Naomi, returned to Bethlehem after the deaths of their husbands.²¹ With no male heir to carry on the family name, Ruth took bold steps to secure her future and that of her late husband’s family.²²

It should be noted that the story of Ruth and Boaz does not involve polygamy. Ruth’s first marriage to Mahlon, one of Naomi’s sons, was monogamous.²³ After Mahlon’s death, Ruth became widowed and sought a kinsman-redeemer to ensure her late husband’s lineage continued. When Ruth approached Boaz, he was willing to redeem her, and nothing in the text says he had another wife.²⁴ The resulting marriage between Ruth and Boaz was monogamous, aligning with the cultural practices of the time.

Boaz’s role as the kinsman-redeemer is central to the story. When Ruth approached him at the threshing floor, Boaz acknowledged the responsibility but also noted there was a closer relative who had the first right of redemption.²⁵ Following proper procedure, Boaz publicly negotiated with this relative, who declined to marry Ruth and redeem the land because it might jeopardize his own inheritance.²⁶ Boaz then stepped forward, fulfilling the role of the redeemer and marrying Ruth.

The union of Ruth and Boaz resulted in the birth of Obed, who became the grandfather of King David.²⁷ That was the purpose of the practice: to “raise up seed” and keep the family line alive. Like the story of Tamar and Judah, it did so without polygamy.

Both unions, Tamar’s and Ruth’s, are in the genealogy of Jesus: Perez and Obed are named in Matthew 1:3–5. Polygamy could, in theory, result from a levirate marriage, but the law doesn’t require it, and the Bible gives no example of it happening. Every levirate story we have is about keeping a dead man’s name alive and caring for his widow, and every one of them is monogamous.

Jacob 2

I have found great value in studying the Book of Mormon by remembering that its authors came from a Near Eastern culture and lived according to the law of Moses, as preserved on the plates of brass. Keeping this in mind when reading Jacob’s sermon to his people can illuminate his message for those living around 544 B.C. While we are encouraged to “liken the scriptures unto ourselves”²⁸, it can also be beneficial to first understand the original context without immediately applying it to a group of people living 2,500 years later. What if we approached verse 30 through the lens of their culture and religion? How would they understand the phrase “raise up seed,” and what significance would it hold for them in their day?

“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.”²⁹ Could the plainest reading of this verse refer to Levirate marriage? In situations where a man dies without leaving an heir, and in the specific circumstance that his brother is already married, then, and only then, might the Lord permit or command him to take a second wife. Otherwise, they are to follow the commandment given to Lehi: “For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;”³⁰ This interpretation aligns with their continued observance of the law of Moses, even though they regarded it as a “dead law” pointing forward to Christ.³¹ Considering the cultural and religious context of the Nephites, this explanation provides a plausible understanding of the Lord’s words in Jacob 2:30.

Points to Consider

• The Nephites, who brought the plates of brass containing the law of Moses, likely understood the phrase “raise up seed” in the same way as it was used in biblical contexts, particularly in reference to Levirate marriage.
• If this interpretation is correct, Jacob 2:30 addresses a specific exception to monogamy, allowed only in God-directed circumstances, rather than a general allowance for polygamy.
• The verse explicitly sets a condition: “if I will… raise up seed unto me, I will command my people.” This suggests that polygamy (or additional wives) was not the norm but an exception permitted only by divine command.
• As seen in the story of Ruth and Boaz, where the closest kinsman-redeemer declined his responsibility, a married Nephite brother-in-law could also refuse to take an additional wife under similar conditions.
• The absence of biblical examples where Levirate marriages resulted in polygamy supports the argument that this exception would apply only rarely and under direct divine instruction.
• It is also possible that the Nephites regarded the commandments given to Lehi as superior to the Law of Moses, choosing to follow a higher Melchizedek law over the more specific provisions of the Aaronic law.
• It makes more sense that Jacob 2:30, a commandment given to Lehi around 600 B.C., applies to the Nephites living at that time. It does not appear to justify a practice that would be observed by Mormon Gentiles ~ 2,400 years later.³²

The Nephites did keep a higher law than Moses in at least one place. The law of Moses regulated slavery,³³ but Nephite law forbade it. King Benjamin never allowed his people to “make slaves one of another.”³⁴ When Limhi’s people were in bondage, he told them it was “better that we be slaves to the Nephites than to pay tribute to the king of the Lamanites.”³⁵ And when the king of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies offered to become the Nephites’ slaves, Ammon answered, “It is against the law of our brethren, which was established by my father, that there should be any slaves among them.”³⁶ If the Nephites could hold a higher law than Moses on slavery, they could hold one on marriage too.

Even so, the levirate law was part of the law of Moses they kept, so they couldn’t simply ignore it. Where Lehi’s commandment of one wife and the levirate law could collide, the Lord had to address it directly, and verse 30 may be where he did.

People of Limhi

The story in Mosiah 21 describes a tragic time for the people of Limhi, who were suffering under Lamanite oppression. After numerous battles, the Nephites were left with many widows because their husbands had been killed in conflict.³⁷ The widows cried out for help, and the people of Limhi showed compassion by supporting them and their children. However, the narrative makes no mention of Levirate marriage as a solution to the widows’ plight.

The people of Limhi had just emerged from the disastrous rule of King Noah, a leader who was specifically condemned by the prophet Abinadi for his wickedness, including taking “many wives and concubines.”³⁸ This experience would have left a lasting impression on Limhi’s people, as they witnessed firsthand the destructive consequences of Noah’s wicked practices.

Given this context, it’s possible that Limhi’s people intentionally avoided practicing Levirate marriage to uphold the commandment given to Lehi, which explicitly instructed them to have “save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none.”³⁹ By preserving the principle of one man and one wife, they may have sought to distinguish themselves from the wickedness they had endured under Noah and align more closely with the commandments of God as they understood them.

This could explain why Limhi’s people focused on supporting widows communally rather than resorting to Levirate marriage.⁴⁰ It reflects their desire to maintain monogamy and uphold the moral reforms necessary to rebuild their community after years of corruption. However, we can only assume what happened as we don’t have all of the details of their situation.

By looking at the Peshat, or plain reading, of Jacob 2:30, we’ve seen how the Levirate law helps explain the idea of “raising up seed.” This practice was important in ancient times to keep family lines going, protect land and inheritance, and care for widows. Understanding this context gives us a clear view of what the verse likely meant for the Nephites.

But scripture often has more than one meaning. While the plain reading focuses on the practical and historical, it might also point to something deeper. Could “raising up seed” mean more than just having children? These questions invite us to look closer and explore other layers of meaning within the text.