56 replies to this topic

[Brian 2.0]

What benefit does the actually sealing ordinance provide from an eternal perspective?

It seems that the blessings of the sealing ordinance are dependent upon our faithfulness.  But if we are faithful, we'll be in the celestial kingdom anyway.

Put the opposite way... If I am not sealed to my child, but both of us live all the laws and inherit celestial glory... what's the difference?  Would I really not be able to see that child because I wasn't sealed to them?

I remember reading "When a Child Wanders" years ago and in it Robert Millet says something to the effect that faithful parents of wayward children will find that in the eternities their children will come back, almost saying there will be more chances for that child, and they won't be lost.  Is there any other place people have heard about this doctrine, any other quotes.

[Log]

Brian 2.0, on 23 April 2012 - 10:40 PM, said:

What benefit does the actually sealing ordinance provide from an eternal perspective?

It seems that the blessings of the sealing ordinance are dependent upon our faithfulness.  But if we are faithful, we'll be in the celestial kingdom anyway.

Put the opposite way... If I am not sealed to my child, but both of us live all the laws and inherit celestial glory... what's the difference?  Would I really not be able to see that child because I wasn't sealed to them?

I remember reading "When a Child Wanders" years ago and in it Robert Millet says something to the effect that faithful parents of wayward children will find that in the eternities their children will come back, almost saying there will be more chances for that child, and they won't be lost.  Is there any other place people have heard about this doctrine, any other quotes.

If we may picture our celestialized, sealed family as a tree, with God as the trunk and the rest of us as branches of varying thickness, I think that's a pretty good analogy to the way things will probably be.  I think if we're not sealed to someone, they'll be on a different part of the tree, but we'll all still be unified, and whole.

Edited by Log, 24 April 2012 - 12:13 AM.

[Spammer]

What does sealing even mean, really?  Assuming the traditional Christian view of heaven is true (Catholic/Orthodox) and my wife, kids and I all make it to heaven, what will I lack that I would have in the LDS exalted realm of the Celestial Kingdom?  If I want to sidle up next to my wife and put my arm around her will God stop me?  Can I say "Hi honey!  Nice to see you made it!  I love you!" or will God cast a withering glance my way to remind me that I can't talk that way anymore since we're no longer married?  Can I walk around heaven holding my wife's hand or will Jesus come up and say, "sorry Spammer, you're no longer married...remember 'til death do you part?  No hand holding!'"  If my parents are there can I run up and hug them and say "hi mom and dad!" or will that be verboten because we're not sealed?  Will my memory of my marriage,parenthood and sonship be wiped out by Jesus because none of us are sealed to each other?  Really, I don't get it.  What is a sealing, exactly, and what will it give me that I won't have in the traditional Christian heaven?

[zerinus]

The relevant LDS scriptures that deal with this subject are as follows:

D&C 131:

1 In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees;
2 And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and deverlasting covenant of emarriage];
3 And if he does not, he cannot obtain it.
4 He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an aincrease.

D&C 132:

15 Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world.
16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.
17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever.

I think the meaning is clear.

Edited by zerinus, 24 April 2012 - 03:39 PM.

[Spammer]

So, I'll be able to hang out with my ex-wife, hold her hand, walk around heaven talking and laughing and reminiscing, enjoying each others' company - just as we did on earth - but I won't be a god and she won't be a goddess and we won't have "eternal increase".  Does that sum it up?

[zerinus]

Spammer, on 24 April 2012 - 02:30 AM, said:

So, I'll be able to hang out with my ex-wife, hold her hand, walk around heaven talking and laughing and reminiscing, enjoying each others' company - just as we did on earth - but I won't be a god and she won't be a goddess and we won't have "eternal increase".  Does that sum it up?

She won't be your wife at all. More likely she will be somebody else's wife, who will be more worthy of the privilege; and you will be left in the lurch!

[Spammer]

zerinus, on 24 April 2012 - 03:52 AM, said:

She won't be your wife at all. More likely she will be somebody else's wife, who will be more worthy of the privilege; and you will be left in the lurch!

But assume that she's there with me in the Terrestrial Kingdom, through her own choice.  Does my summary statement accurately summarize?  We won't be a god or goddess or have eternal increase, but we can walk around together holding hands, laughing and reminiscing and enjoying each others' company.  For eternity.  Correct?

[zerinus]

Spammer, on 24 April 2012 - 03:57 AM, said:

But assume that she's there with me in the Terrestrial Kingdom, through her own choice. Does my summary statement accurately summarize? We won't be a god or goddess or have eternal increase, but we can walk around together holding hands, laughing and reminiscing and enjoying each others' company. For eternity. Correct?

I suppose you could do that with any lady friend here on earth if you wanted to (including with someone else's wife, if her husband didn't object). Not quite the same as being married to her though!

[Spammer]

zerinus, on 24 April 2012 - 04:41 AM, said:

I suppose you could do that with any lady friend here on earth if you wanted to (including with someone else's wife, if her husband didn't object). Not quite the same as being married to her though!

Does presence of the marital bond deepen the relationship or is it an outward sign that signifies the permanence of a relationship already established?  It seems the value of an eternal sealing (for those who do not believe in Joseph Smith) would lie precisely here.  There must be something about marriage that marks a dividing line between two qualitatively distinct modes of the relationship.

[Spammer]

In other words, it seems to me that the statement "I loved my wife before we were married but after the moment of our marriage my love for her became even stronger" or something like it must apply at a deep level in our actual experience to avoid the conclusion that marriage is primarily an outward sign and a licence to procreate.

[Spammer]

Or put it another way.  I love my wife now.  At the moment "til death do you part" applies, will my love for her necessarily be altered in either quality or quantity?  Again, it seems the answer must be "yes" if marriage is nothing more than a contract and license to procreate.

[zerinus]

Spammer, on 24 April 2012 - 04:46 AM, said:

Does presence of the marital bond deepen the relationship or is it an outward sign that signifies the permanence of a relationship already established?  It seems the value of an eternal sealing (for those who do not believe in Joseph Smith) would lie precisely here.  There must be something about marriage that marks a dividing line between two qualitatively distinct modes of the relationship.

Spammer, on 24 April 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

In other words, it seems to me that the statement "I loved my wife before we were married but after the moment of our marriage my love for her became even stronger" or something like it must apply at a deep level in our actual experience to avoid the conclusion that marriage is primarily an outward sign and a licence to procreate.

Spammer, on 24 April 2012 - 04:52 AM, said:

Or put it another way.  I love my wife now.  At the moment "til death do you part" applies, will my love for her necessarily be altered in either quality or quantity?  Again, it seems the answer must be "yes" if marriage is nothing more than a contract and license to procreate.

Or look at it another way. While you are unmarried here on earth, you can take any other unmarried lady on a date, hold her hands, kiss her on her cheek; and so can somebody else. And beyond that you cannot go. If you and your wife go to the terrestrial kingdom by your own choice, you will no longer will be married, and the same situation will prevail there (I presume). You can take her out on a date, and so can somebody else.

[Buzzard]

Spammer, on 24 April 2012 - 04:52 AM, said:

Or put it another way.  I love my wife now.  At the moment "til death do you part" applies, will my love for her necessarily be altered in either quality or quantity?  Again, it seems the answer must be "yes" if marriage is nothing more than a contract and license to procreate.

Well, here is the way we LDS look at it.  When you get to the other side and see that we were right all along, provided the spirit has not witnessed that to you already in this life, then you will be on your spirit knees praying that one of your descendants will join the church and do your temple work so that you and your wife CAN be sealed and married for eternity.

[Spammer]

zerinus, on 24 April 2012 - 06:20 AM, said:

Or look at it another way. While you are unmarried here on earth, you can take any other unmarried lady on a date, hold her hands, kiss her on her cheek; and so can somebody else. And beyond that you cannot go. If you and your wife go to the terrestrial kingdom by your own choice, you will no longer will be married, and the same situation will prevail there (I presume). You can take her out on a date, and so can somebody else.

Ah..but keeping with the hypothetical situation I envisioned, let's assume my wife volunteers for the Terrestrial Kingdom so she can be with me and only with me.  We're no longer married, but so what?  Anyone who asks her out on a date will be turned down.  I still get to hold her hand, laugh and reminisce, be in love, have an eternal, romantic relationship.  The relationship just won't be sexual.

[Spammer]

Buzzard, on 24 April 2012 - 06:31 AM, said:

Well, here is the way we LDS look at it.  When you get to the other side and see that we were right all along, provided the spirit has not witnessed that to you already in this life, then you will be on your spirit knees praying that one of your descendants will join the church and do your temple work so that you and your wife CAN be sealed and married for eternity.

You first have to convince me that the kind of eternal relationship I will have with my wife in the Terrestrial Kingdom will be qualitatively distinct from a Celestial relationship - if you remove from consideration the godhood and eternal increase component.

[Maidservant]

These are good questions, Spammer, and you've awakened in me a desire to know more about sealing.

I don't know about husband-wife relationship, but for myself, I know that we will know our families and that nothing can wipe out the event of our birth to them.  For example, my biological father had a very troubled life and, in fact, I was adopted legally by my step-father in a very long story.  But the point being is that I am never going to forget my biological father, I miss him terribly (he's passed on now), and in any eternity where the possibility comes that I can visit him and continue that father-daughter relationship, that is exactly what I am going to do.  And if there is any eternity where that is barred to me, I will not be in any happiness and "the celestial kingdom" will be worthless to me.  By the same token, I have a brother who has troubles.  The rest of my brothers and sisters have sealings in the temples and my brother hasn't prepared himself to go yet.  If he and we die in this way, he can NEVER stop being our brother, and I'm pretty sure he will still be invited to dinner in our eternal homes.

I should disclose that, for the most part, I don't hold the idea that human beings will be geographically separated from each other into "telestial", "terrestrial" and "celestial" planets or camps or cities or whatever.  My personal understanding is that, as the human family, we will still be together, more or less (barring those who truly wish to harm and may need to be directed to another place for safety reasons).  And that when the scriptures give the idea that others cannot come into the celestial kingdom, it is a matter of progress that those who do not keep laws cannot know the miracles and blessings and realities of those laws.  For example, again, my brother cannot know what it is to be a husband and father--until he does it.  A person who is unwilling to forgive can never know what it's like to be a forgiving person--he cannot "come" there.  And he might not believe how wonderful it is. It's like the parable of the ten virgins--we all have to have our own oil.

I also reject the idea that the purpose of the sealing is some sort of hierarchical kingdom with the father on the throne and his one plus wives in a counselor position, and his children looking to him as a leader.  Of course, it is natural in a loving family for children to admire the father and perhaps take his advice.  But, let's face it, as we imagine now at least, we are all going to be adults after we complete mortality, and if we are all in sealing couples (or plus), then who is there that is going to need to be ruled?  I mean, seriously, me and my husband are going to spend a lot of time just TRAVELING (Andromeda Galaxy anyone?), and GARDENING and whatnot--I am not going to be micromanaging my children and their spouses, who are already in a sealing with their spouse and living their independent lives of love with each other.  The only thing I'm gonna do is a lot of texting with them, and the frequent family BBQ.

So I guess I have the same question you do.  What is exactly is the necessity and nature of the sealing?  I don't doubt that there is a necessary nature to it, but I think I need to learn exactly what that is, since it doesn't seem to be any of the things I traditionally thought.

[zerinus]

Spammer, on 24 April 2012 - 06:36 AM, said:

Ah..but keeping with the hypothetical situation I envisioned, let's assume my wife volunteers for the Terrestrial Kingdom so she can be with me and only with me.  We're no longer married, but so what?  Anyone who asks her out on a date will be turned down.  I still get to hold her hand, laugh and reminisce, be in love, have an eternal, romantic relationship.  The relationship just won't be sexual.

Spammer, on 24 April 2012 - 06:39 AM, said:

You first have to convince me that the kind of eternal relationship I will have with my wife in the Terrestrial Kingdom will be qualitatively distinct from a Celestial relationship - if you remove from consideration the godhood and eternal increase component.

Mormon doctrine is that which is revealed in Mormon scripture; and according to the verses I quoted, those who choose to opt out of eternal marriage will simply not be married in the next life, and will therefore not enjoy the kind of companionship that that relationship brings. What kinds of relationships they will be able to enjoy is anybody's guess.

[Buzzard]

Spammer, on 24 April 2012 - 06:39 AM, said:

You first have to convince me that the kind of eternal relationship I will have with my wife in the Terrestrial Kingdom will be qualitatively distinct from a Celestial relationship - if you remove from consideration the godhood and eternal increase component.

Is your relationship with your wife different now than when she was your girlfriend?  Even removing "marital relations", my guess is yes. Well, that's the difference.
Also, the godhood and eternal increase won't be removed.  Hard to argue that wouldn't make much of a difference.

Edited by Buzzard, 24 April 2012 - 08:25 AM.

[calmoriah]

Spammer, on 24 April 2012 - 06:36 AM, said:

Ah..but keeping with the hypothetical situation I envisioned, let's assume my wife volunteers for the Terrestrial Kingdom so she can be with me and only with me.  We're no longer married, but so what?  Anyone who asks her out on a date will be turned down.  I still get to hold her hand, laugh and reminisce, be in love, have an eternal, romantic relationship.  The relationship just won't be sexual.

I think it will be more than just being able to have eternal increase in a Celestial marriage.  One needs to remember that the Kingdoms aren't just about location or what one is allowed to do.  It is also about the quality and attributes of the person there.  Someone who has chosen the Terrestrial Kingdom has accepted part of the Atonement, the forgiveness of his sins, but not all of the blessings the Lord is willing to share with him, he does not receive the full inheritance.  He has given his personal wants and desires a greater place in his life than the Will of the Lord.  He has chosen not to be come fully one with God and therefore not fully one with anyone else.  

All these choices mean that the deepness of any relationship that occurs on a Terrestrial level will be much more superficial/shallow than one that exists between Celestial beings, whether it's marriage or brothers or parent and child or some other family relationship (we are all family in the CK, the sealing provides for that).  Since we currently lack the ability to share at this level, we have no way to compare the difference but at the very least it will be like the difference between how two young children who see the world as revolving around them, who see the other as more of an extension of them than a separate being and thus are unable to see the other as they truly are and a relationship between a man and woman who have lovingly lived their lives together, given up and sacrificed for each other sometimes even their cherished dreams because they care more about the happiness of their loved one and the healthiness of their relationship, and who have reached the point where they can communicate with each other almost without words.  Perhaps it will even be as different to the degree that a relationship between two blind, deaf and mute individuals is different from the relationship between two people who can do all that plus read each other's mind.

If you don't want a relationship that is more than what it is in this life, than it would seem the Terrestrial would make a relatively good fit.  Relationships with no strings attached, but not much depth either....at least in comparison to what might be.  However, if you want a relationship like that which is promised by the Lord for his children where man and wife are truly one with each other and with the Lord with all that implies, then one will need to open oneself up to the Lord, humble oneself by accepting the Lord's Will as one's own (and since the Lord's Will is about giving joy to his children, the only sacrifice is putting one's pride on the altar, imo), and embrace the fullness of the Atonement.

Edited by calmoriah, 24 April 2012 - 10:41 AM.

[Brian 2.0]

Back to my original question...

If parents are sealed to their children, and that child is not faithful to the church, but the parents are true and faithful is the sealing to the child null and void?  Will there be any benefit to the parents or the child having been sealed to each other?