AMANDA - In the section of your website, "17 Little Known Truths About the Mormons; by Joel Hardy," under FACT #6 "Mormons consider Polygamy a righteous principle which will be practiced in heaven," the author lists Isaiah 4:1 as a verse in the Bible that shows that Polygamy will be reinstated after the coming of the Lord. "And even though God has postponed the practicing of this principle for now, it will apparently be reinstated after the coming of the Lord, as explained in Isaiah 4:1
"And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach."
My question is after reading this verse and several verses proceeding it starting with Isaiah 3:1, it seems to me that this part of scripture is simply a statement of how things will be after the coming of the Lord and the Lord's judgement on Jerusalem and Judah. "For, behold the Lord... doth take away from Jersalem and Judah... And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another." It seems that the examples of 'how things will be' proceeding this verse are negative, ie, "...instead of sweet smell there shall be stink; and instead of a girdle a rent; and instead of well set hair baldness..." I realize that in verse 2 of Chapter 4 there is a transition to "...the branch of the Lord be beautiful..." and I suppose the argument could be made to place v.1 in this group but it doesn't seem to make sense to me as these women "shall take hold of one man..." and promise to "...eat our own bread and wear our own apparel..." as if begging.
I know this is a very trivial question, however, I wonder if my understanding of the verse is incorrect or is my understanding of the usage of the verse incorrect? And if it isn't incorrect then isn't the use of the verse as a proof for the reinstatement of polygamy misleading? Just because polygamy may exist doesn't necessarily mean that it is a decree from the Lord. Earlier in Fact #1 the author makes the statement, "...By reading it carefully and in context..." Is the author guilty of the same thing? that is, quoting a verse without it's context?
I do hope that you will not take this question to be offensive or an attack. I am simply curious to know your opinion on the meaning of this verse, realizing that I am not an expert on the Bible.

JOEL - Both verses 1 and 2 in Isaiah 4 say "and in that day".

1. AND in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.
2. In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel. (Isa. 4:1-2)

If they are both talking about the same day then it seems they both are refering to the beautiful and glorious day of the coming of the Lord. But notice I said it will "apparently" be reinstated. I don't know for sure that the scripture is refering to plural marriage. My reason for saying what I did is based on comments from a few past church leaders who were of the opinion that the scripture in question might mean that plural marriage will be practiced again after the second coming, during Christ's Millenial reign. We have had no deffinitive revelation from God that states that this will be the case, but this is how some interpret it.

Here's another way to look at it. In the Hebrew text, the Isaiah 4:1 verse is placed at the end of chapter three. It serves as the conclusion to that chapter. So if you look at it in this way, rather than being about plural marriage, one could reason that the war that stripped Israel of her leadership and disgraced the daughters of Zion and killed off most of the men(See Isaiah 3:25-26), left a ratio of women to men at seven to one. So these women, who once had lost sight of their divine role, were now desparate and have been humbled, and are willing to do anything to have the reproach of being childless removed.
So in a sense they are begging, as you said, to the few men that are left to take them so they can bear children.
But even though this scripture might not be about plural marriage, I still believe that the principle was sanctioned by God in Old Testament times and was again in the early days of our church, and could happen again sometime in the future if God commands it.
Thanks for your question. It made me do a little more in depth study about that scripture and because of the uncertainty of it I think I will remove that reference from FACT #6.