Powerful And Unbreakable Sealing Power Of Parents

[Calm]

It seems to me that the love and desire to have one's children with one cannot be any greater than God's love and desire to have his children with him, if so than what he promises us as parents must also apply to him and all his children.

[bluebell]

It seems to me that the love and desire to have one's children with one cannot be any greater than God's love and desire to have his children with him, if so than what he promises us as parents must also apply to him and all his children.

I was actually thinking of this as well. God knows that He will lose some of His children to their choices. Should we be consigned to possibility of the same fate?

[mercyngrace]

I was actually thinking of this as well. God knows that He will lose some of His children to their choices. Should we be consigned to possibility of the same fate?

Would you consider resigning yourself to losing one or more of your children "good" news?

[bluebell]

Would you consider resigning yourself to losing one or more of your children "good" news?

Of course not. But if agency and progession meant so much to our Heavenly Father that He was willing to lose many of His children, should we believe that He would not allow us to experience the same thing because it would difficult?

[Duncan]

Would you consider resigning yourself to losing one or more of your children "good" news?

I love this quotation from Pres. Clark

“You know, I believe that the Lord will help us. I believe if we go to him, he will give us wisdom, if we are living righteously. I believe he will answer our prayers. I believe that our Heavenly Father wants to save every one of his children. I do not think he intends to shut any of us off because of some slight transgression, some slight failure to observe some rule or regulation. There are the great elementals that we must observe, but he is not going to be captious about the lesser things.

“I believe that his juridical concept of his dealings with his children could be expressed in this way: I believe that in his justice and mercy, he will give us the maximum reward for our acts, give us all that he can give, and in the reverse, I believe that he will impose upon us the minimum penalty which it is possible for him to impose.”

so, in the end I trust that whatever happens to me or my son I trust that God will deal justly and mercifully and won't impose upon his agency, but I have to do my part in everything

[mercyngrace]

Of course not. But if agency and progession meant so much to our Heavenly Father that He was willing to lose many of His children, should we believe that He would not allow us to experience the same thing because it would difficult?

I didn't say anything about difficulty. I just asked whether such news would be "good". Personally, I think it is much easier to write someone off than to love them toward better choices.

Of course, I don't necessarily agree with your premise that God expects to lose many of His children, at least not in the sense that the separation is unending.

[mercyngrace]

so, in the end I trust that whatever happens to me or my son I trust that God will deal justly and mercifully and won't impose upon his agency, but I have to do my part in everything

That's one of my favorite quotes, too. And I wholeheartedly agree that He will be both perfectly just and perfectly merciful without imposing His will on us or stripping us of our agency.

[bluebell]

I didn't say anything about difficulty. I just asked whether such news would be "good". Personally, I think it is much easier to write someone off than to love them toward better choices.

I guess i'm confused why you asked then, since you obviously already knew that i would say that losing one of my children would not be good news.

I disagree though in that i don't believe writing one of my children off would ever be easier than loving them. I haven't ever had to put that into practice though so i'm speaking in hypotheticals in regards to my own children.

I do think it's easier to write the people off that you don't love very much because it's true that loving people through bad choices is VERY hard (saying that having a couple people in my family who have put me to the test)

[mercyngrace]

I guess i'm confused why you asked then, since you obviously already knew that i would say that losing one of my children would not be good news.

I'm just wondering what level of joy we can expect if we are resigned to losing our loved ones forever. If this is the "good news", that infinite punishment follows finite sins, and there is ultimately a point of absolutely no return - that on some predetermined date God's parenting switch flips and He no longer goes out after His lost, I'm wondering what all the shouts of joy were for. And I'm wondering if the unhappy state of a heartbroken parent is worth striving to attain.

I disagree though in that i don't believe writing one of my children off would ever be easier than loving them. I haven't ever had to put that into practice though so i'm speaking in hypotheticals in regards to my own children.

I do think it's easier to write the people off that you don't love very much because it's true that loving people through bad choices is VERY hard (saying that having a couple people in my family who have put me to the test)

I think divorce statistics, a single example among many, validate my premise that it is much easier to write people off than to love one who has wounded us. I agree that doing so with your own child would be difficult but there are plenty of estranged parents and children who've also abandoned the hard work of loving relationship in favor of distance and disconnect.

[bluebell]

I'm just wondering what level of joy we can expect if we are resigned to losing our loved ones forever. If this is the "good news", that infinite punishment follows finite sins, and there is ultimately a point of absolutely no return - that on some predetermined date God's parenting switch flips and He no longer goes out after His lost, I'm wondering what all the shouts of joy were for. And I'm wondering if the unhappy state of a heartbroken parent is worth striving to attain.

I honestly have no idea, but i'm not comfortable with ignoring the words of the scriptures on the subject just because i don't understand it (and not that you are doing that, i'm just speaking for myself and my own understanding of scriptures).

However, we believe that God has a fulness of Joy right now, even knowing that lucifer is lost to him, for example. How that can be, i don't know, but it's what the scriptures seem to teach so I have to lean on that understanding. I would imagine that part of that ability comes from HIs knowledge that He did all He could and that Lucifer (using the same example) is where he chose to be and where he is happiest.

I think divorce statistics, a single example among many, validate my premise that it is much easier to write people off than to love one who has wounded us. I agree that doing so with your own child would be difficult but there are plenty of estranged parents and children who've also abandoned the hard work of loving relationship in favor of distance and disconnect.

Again, this has not been my experience. I believe that selfishness is rampant in our society and that loving someone else more than our own egos can be very hard (as divorce seems to show), but i don't believe that equates to it being easier to write off our children than to love them when it get's difficult. I have seen too many parents go through hell trying to love their children (or their spouses) to believe that the norm is to walk away when it gets hard.

[mercyngrace]

I honestly have no idea, but i'm not comfortable with ignoring the words of the scriptures on the subject just because i don't understand it (and not that you are doing that, i'm just speaking for myself and my own understanding of scriptures).

I feel the same way, which is (ironically) why we disagree. Thank goodness the issue doesn't have to be resolved tonight - lol!

However, we believe that God has a fulness of Joy right now, even knowing that lucifer is lost to him, for example. How that can be, i don't know, but it's what the scriptures seem to teach so I have to lean on that understanding. I would imagine that part of that ability comes from HIs knowledge that He did all He could and that Lucifer (using the same example) is where he chose to be and where he is happiest.

Lucifer is miserable. Interestingly, the very section of D&C that idenitifies Lucifer as Perdition says that no man knows his fate except those who are partakers of the same. It's also interesting that Lucifer and his sons are described as vessels of wrath - a reference to the parable of the potter perhaps?

I definitely agree that the scriptures on many levels seem to teach a less than thrilling outcome.

Again, this has not been my experience. I believe that selfishness is rampant in our society and that loving someone else more than our own egos can be very hard (as divorce seems to show), but i don't believe that equates to it being easier to write off our children than to love them when it get's difficult. I have seen too many parents go through hell trying to love their children (or their spouses) to believe that the norm is to walk away when it gets hard.

I never said it was the norm to walk away from one's children when they stray.

I said it is easier to write someone off than love them toward salvation and I cited the prevalence of divorce recalling Bishop Theodore Burton's words that the solution to nearly all marital problems is repentance and forgiveness. Refusing to forgive and refusing to repent in a marriage is writing each other, and sometimes ourselves, off, IMO.

[bluebell]

I feel the same way, which is (ironically) why we disagree. Thank goodness the issue doesn't have to be resolved tonight - lol!

Lucifer is miserable.

And it's as 'happy' as he's ever going to be.

As i understand it, satan couldn't be happy in God's presence because it's not what he desires-satan is where he has chosen to be. Therefore, he's happiest where he is or will end up, even though it's not actually 'happiness' as we would define it.

I never said it was the norm to walk away from one's children when they stray.

Sorry to misunderstand you. When you used divorce stats to argue your point i assumed you were using the norm of divorce to imply that the norm was to leave rather than love through difficulties.

I said it is easier to write someone off than love them toward salvation and I cited the prevalence of divorce recalling Bishop Theodore Burton's words that the solution to nearly all marital problems is repentance and forgiveness. Refusing to forgive and refusing to repent in a marriage is writing each other, and sometimes ourselves, off, IMO.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

In my opinion, refusing to forgive and refusing to repent is simply the natural man winning out over the spiritual man-a sign of our sinful and selfish natures triumphing. I don't think its a sign that someone chose to write the other one off because loving them was too hard. I do think that does happen sometimes, no doubt,, i just don't think it's prevalent, especially not when it comes to a person's children.

[mercyngrace]

And it's as 'happy' as he's ever going to be.

As i understand it, satan couldn't be happy in God's presence because it's not what he desires-satan is where he has chosen to be. Therefore, he's happiest where he is or will end up, even though it's not actually 'happiness' as we would define it.

Where does this idea come from, that Satan chose misery? The scriptures indicate he was thrown out and the imagery used is that of a battle. Just wondering if this is scriptural and I've forgotten something or if it is just a widely made inference? He did make a choice but misery and exile was the consequence of that choice, not the choice itself.

Also, if this is the pattern our children are going to follow, inheriting endless misery and banishment to the degree they fell short of the Celestial Kingdom, I am back to the original question. Is this "good news"?

Sorry to misunderstand you. When you used divorce stats to argue your point i assumed you were using the norm of divorce to imply that the norm was to leave rather than love through difficulties.

My original statement clearly indicates that divorce stats are a single example and I further separate the parental relationship by addressing that secondarily. Here are my words:

I think divorce statistics, a single example among many, validate my premise that it is much easier to write people off than to love one who has wounded us. I agree that doing so with your own child would be difficult but there are plenty of estranged parents and children who've also abandoned the hard work of loving relationship in favor of distance and disconnect.

I think we just miscommunicated - hazard of dialogue, even among friends.

PS I didn't address the last bit of your post because we've both agreed to disagree and we are going round and round about opinions anyway. That's silly since there's room for both of them.

[bluebell]

Where does this idea come from, that Satan chose misery? The scriptures indicate he was thrown out and the imagery used is that of a battle. Just wondering if this is scriptural and I've forgotten something or if it is just a widely made inference? He did make a choice but misery and exile was the consequence of that choice, not the choice itself.

I don't think he chose to be miserable, i think he chose to fight against God because he was happier rebelling than following. In other words, i believe his rebellion made him happier than any other choice, which is why he chose it.

In other words, I don't believe satan could ever be happy or find joy in a kingdom of Glory, therefore, he will be 'happiest' where he will end up, though it won't be happiness at all.

Also, if this is the pattern our children are going to follow, inheriting endless misery and banishment to the degree they fell short of the Celestial Kingdom, I am back to the original question. Is this "good news"?

It's not the pattern our children will follow.

I used satan as an example in response to your question of how God can experience a fullness of joy even though some of his children have chosen eternal damnation. I only suggested that if God is capable of a fullness of Joy in such circumstances, then there would be precedent for us to be capable of the same thing. I explained that i don't know exactly how it would be possible but gave some thoughts on it, that's all.

Hope you have a great New Year's Day! I'm holding out hope that we get to sing 'ring out wild bells' at church today!

Edited January 1, 2012 by bluebell

[mercyngrace]

What comes to mind is that we are only accountable for what we know and Moses says that Satan didn't have complete knowledge. I believe that there is much less cut and dried about progression than we currently presume but I love asking the questions because they force me to think about what I don't know and reevaluate my assumptions.

That's why I joined the conversation and asked about the "good news".

Personally, I believe that God weeps for our self-inflicted torment but I also believe He experiences perfect joy because He knows many things of which we are, as yet, mostly unaware.

PS We didn't sing Ring Out Wild Bells... lamentable!

[bluebell]

PS We didn't sing Ring Out Wild Bells... lamentable!

Us either! I was thoroughly disappointed.

[Calm]

As far as it being easier to cut off or not, remember we are not talking mortality, but about perfect, complete emotionally mature and balanced beings, with the ability to wait as long as necessary, the patience to do so and the knowledge of what that patience, love, long-suffering and ability to forgive can accomplish at the end. Such beings don't make choices based on ease, but on what is most just and most merciful, what is right and good.

I see the only reason God would ever cut someone off was if he had perfect knowledge that individual would not only not ever return to the fold, but that it would cause his child less pain to remove any connection of spirit still existing...perhaps any such contact with the truly lost would ultimately destroy them, having purged themselves of that which is divine perhaps the simple presence of the divine no matter how limited is destructive to them in some way. His work is to bring eternal joy to man, but when that is not an option (though this is an assumption based on scriptures) it seems to me he gives as much blessings as possible and limits any negative fallout or punishment to the least amount effective for the purpose, basic maximising pleasure and minimising pain for that individual. Not what we would call happiness, but the closest that individual is willing to come to it.

I also don't see him personally cutting off anyone, rather he just allows them to continue to make the choices that little by little remove their freedom and range of possibility down to just one choice....turn back and set your face towards God and that is a choice the truly lost will never take.

If you haven't done it yet and this topic interests you, I would suggest reading CS Lewis' the Great Divorce (or Divide, I can never remember which).

I found the book a well envisioned of one possibility of how this might occur. I didn't see it as the 'reality' to come but that it gave hints of what might be involved. It is a good springboard for one's own ideas. Of course the organisation and activity of Heaven is not how LDS would describe it, but the relationships between the saved and damned could be useful in imagining what they actually might be and I found the attitude of the damned likely to be close to what the reality will be since I see the ultimate flaw of those who turn their back on the Lord to be Pride, a sense of self so centred it allows no room in the soul for anyone else and has the drive to do whatever is necessary, to give up everything else to keep itself 'pure', 'independent' and uncontrolled by others.

Edited January 1, 2012 by calmoriah

[Calm]

Also JS talked iirc that it would be impossible to become an SOP in the afterlife. If there is a condition that sets up when and how this can occur, I don't see why the cut off must be after this life and not before, It is possible in my view that all those who made the choice to accept their first estate have already demonstrated that inability to become SOP, thus allowing for all those born to eventually have some level of glory and divine relationship.

Cain is the only one I think anyone is more or less certain about, his mortal life seemed about as close to our pre mortal one as possible, at least in the sense of having such an open relationship at once with both God and Satan. After Cain, such divine casual companionship is not described. So if one insists that Cain is destined to be an outcast, it is possible to view his situation as unique in mortality more akin to what occurred during our first estate.

[Kenngo1969]

This makes sense to me as well.

Except, i still wonder how it works in regards to the verses in the BOM which clearly state we cannot put of our repentance until the next life-

"For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors.

And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed." ...

Perhaps it means that in this life, we are able to labor to repent ... to try again, to work on our shortcomings, to do what we need to do to become better people ... while, consistent with the scripture in D&C 19, we will not be able to labor to repent in the next life; rather, the only way we will be able to repent in the next life is [shudder!] to suffer as Christ suffered.

[bluebell]

Perhaps it means that in this life, we are able to labor to repent ... to try again, to work on our shortcomings, to do what we need to do to become better people ... while, consistent with the scripture in D&C 19, we will not be able to labor to repent in the next life; rather, the only way we will be able to repent in the next life is [shudder!] to suffer as Christ suffered.

That definitely could be what it is saying.

[ERayR]

And this one:

The saving principle of aTemple Sealing is so powerful that many prophets have used little qualifying language in their sweeping promises. For example, Brigham Young said, “I care not where those children go, they are bound up to their parents by an everlasting tie, and no power of earth or hell can separate them from their parents in eternity; they will return again to the fountain from whence they sprang” (Discourses of Brigham Young, 208).

It appears that the sealing power of righteous parents literally has the ability to intercede on behalf of wayward children, either in this life or the next. For me, this is just another wonderful example of the power of the Atonement and mercy of our Savior.

For me I take great comfort in this little-understood doctrine. There is real power, beyond our own capacity to fully comprehend, offered by the Atonement of Jesus Christ, as it is manifested in the covenants and ordinances of a Temple Sealing.

What are your thoughts on how this applies to each of us through the sealing of Adam and Eve, our first parents?

Also, is this a case where love, mercy and grace trumps the free agency of a wayward child?

It does not say they will automatically be brought to the Celestial Kingdom but that whatever place they end up they are still your children.

[Peppermint Patty]

ERayR,

It's pretty clear that these wayward children will gain the Celestial Kingdom (Exhaltation):

"If you succeed in passing through these trials and afflictions and receive a resurrection, you will, by the power of the Priesthood, work and labor, as the Son of God has, until you get all your sons and daughters in the path of exaltation and glory. This is just as sure as that the sun rose this morning over yonder mountains. Therefore, mourn not because all your sons and daughters do not follow in the path that you have marked out to them, or give heed to your counsels. Inasmuch as we succeed in securing eternal glory, and stand as saviors, and as kings and priests to our God, we will save our posterity” (Lorenzo Snow in Collected Discourses, 3:364).

Again, I don't understand this doctrine fully, but I believe it as taught by numerous Prophets and Apostles. The Savior's Atonement truly knows no bounds.

Edited January 27, 2012 by Peppermint Patty

[Kenngo1969]

That definitely could be what it is saying.

As challenging as it is to labor to repent, I think it'll still be easier than suffering to repent. I'm gonna do my dangedest to do the former so I don't have to do the latter!

[inquiringmind]

...What are your thoughts on how this applies to each of us through the sealing of Adam and Eve, our first parents? ...

Two questions come to my mind here.

1.) Do we know that both our first parents (Adam and Eve) are saved?

2.) And is it possible to have a loved one sealed to them in the Temple?

Edited February 12, 2012 by inquiringmind

[The Nehor]

Two questions come to my mind here.

1.) Do we know that both our first parents (Adam and Eve) are saved?

Yes.

2.) And is it possible to have a loved one sealed to them in the Temple?

Only through a pretty hefty chain of people.