Temble Sealing Guaranteeing Salvation For Children?

[LDSBruin]

This is an interesting point of doctrine that I have frequently thought about. I believe the children of righteous parents receive many great blessings in this life thanks to their parents righteousness. However, I cannot believe that my own good or bad behavior will in any way affect my children's eternal salvation.

The only way I can see this idea of a sealing insuring the salvation of ones children being true is if as William James suggests all will eventually have that same chance to receive it. Any other way you look at it, the parents who chose to be sealed are offering free salvation to their children, something I believe only Christ can offer.

To qualify that remark, I think it is most definitely a "free ride" if the sealing in any way insures salvation because any thorny paths, suffering for sins and painful repentance required before entering the CK could only be temporary and thus totally inconsequential.

Regarding, D&C 137:10

10 And I also beheld that all children who die before they arrive at the years of accountability are saved in the celestial kingdom of heaven

Reading the rest of the section seems to be a discussion of the fact that no opportunities are lost for those who die without the gospel. Could this be the same for children before the years of accountability? Honestly, I don't buy the idea that a 7.9 year old child is any more innocent than a 8.1 year old, so where do you draw the line? I don't think it is speaking of guaranteed salvation, but full opportunity for salvation. Otherwise killing children under 8 is a good thing as far as the children are concerned? (I know that sounds like a terrible thing to say, but is that implied by a strict reading of the verse?)

[Calm]

Reading the rest of the section seems to be a discussion of the fact that no opportunities are lost for those who die without the gospel. Could this be the same for children before the years of accountability? Honestly, I don't buy the idea that a 7.9 year old child is any more innocent than a 8.1 year old, so where do you draw the line? I don't think it is speaking of guaranteed salvation, but full opportunity for salvation. Otherwise killing children under 8 is a good thing as far as the children are concerned? (I know that sounds like a terrible thing to say, but is that implied by a strict reading of the verse?)

I read this the same way you do...

Guaranteed salvation/exaltation contradicts the principle of agency.

[CMZ]

Funny, I thought I was at a "TBM" board. "O ye of little faith . . . "

"And now I cannot say more; the Spirit stoppeth mine utterance, and I am left to mourn because of the unbelief, and the ignorance of men; for they will not search knowledge, nor understand great knowledge, when it is given unto them in plainness, even as plain as word can be."

[Abulafia]

My experience in the church as someone with inactive parents was interesting. This issue did come up, along with those born in the covenant, having earned that 'blessing' in the pre-existence.

In practical every day terms, it's a tricky one. I have watched the children of a stake president get away with a lot in terms of church discipline simply because their parents were nepotists. That's muddied by the priesthood authority thing, so one comes away thinking that because the parent is giving special treatment to the children then God favours them also.

Sorry if this seems a bit mixed up. In the long run, it didn't work to the children's advantage because they knew I think the injustice that existed between how they and other single members were treated, and rebelled even more. (and all this is my opinion of course)

Anyway....I think that there is a widespread belief among the grass roots of the church, that this is the case. That children born in the covenant are 'extra special' that they have earned that blessing in the pre-existence and that ultimately they will all return. This was a common line I heard whenever the children of a temple-sealed couple went off the rails.

Actually, I think they are right, taking into account the children's free agency. In a system of 'eternal progression' I think it would all work out anyhow. So, in T Shirt's example, I would say that the other twin will get the same opportunities to progress after this life is over, if he chooses. That would seem the most just course anyway.

I think the belief, even if it is not particularly doctrinal (temple sealing guaranteeing salvation for children), is divisive ultimately, because it makes some people 'more equal' than others 'more loved'. I'm not so sure that God is actually like that. No respector of persons and all that. He takes you for what you are in consideration of where you came from in my opinion, and works with that, no matter.

Mary

[charity]

My experience in the church as someone with inactive parents was interesting. This issue did come up, along with those born in the covenant, having earned that 'blessing' in the pre-existence.

In practical every day terms, it's a tricky one. I have watched the children of a stake president get away with a lot in terms of church discipline simply because their parents were nepotists. That's muddied by the priesthood authority thing, so one comes away thinking that because the parent is giving special treatment to the children then God favours them also.

Sorry if this seems a bit mixed up. In the long run, it didn't work to the children's advantage because they knew I think the injustice that existed between how they and other single members were treated, and rebelled even more. (and all this is my opinion of course)

Anyway....I think that there is a widespread belief among the grass roots of the church, that this is the case. That children born in the covenant are 'extra special' that they have earned that blessing in the pre-existence and that ultimately they will all return. This was a common line I heard whenever the children of a temple-sealed couple went off the rails.

Actually, I think they are right, taking into account the children's free agency. In a system of 'eternal progression' I think it would all work out anyhow. So, in T Shirt's example, I would say that the other twin will get the same opportunities to progress after this life is over, if he chooses. That would seem the most just course anyway.

I think the belief, even if it is not particularly doctrinal (temple sealing guaranteeing salvation for children), is divisive ultimately, because it makes some people 'more equal' than others 'more loved'. I'm not so sure that God is actually like that. No respector of persons and all that. He takes you for what you are in consideration of where you came from in my opinion, and works with that, no matter.

Mary

I think the judgement of God is going to be much different than what we think it will be. God knows everything. He knows what a person is really accountable for, and what he isn't, which is what you say in your last sentence there. Our attempt to judge (which we shouldn't do) is extremely flawed.

I don't look at the "special blessing" in the same way you do. My children were all BIC. We didn't treat them leniently because they were "special" and let them get away with anything. We tried to teach them correctly. We held to family rules.

I look at the "special blessing" as being a comfort to parents who have done everything they can and their kids are straying for a time. 2 of mine are, right now. So, instead of disparing I can have hope that they will be all right in the end.

After all, everything works out good in the end, and it if it isn't good right now, it isn't the end.

[Calm]

Funny, I thought I was at a "TBM" board. "O ye of little faith . . . "

Not sure what you are criticizing here...if my agreement with Bruin, I have great faith in the Atonement, the Plan of Salvation and the Mercy and Justice of God and his love for his children...so much love in fact that he is willing to allow them to make mistakes and suffer in order that they have the chance at the greatest possible happiness in the long run.

I do not have automatic faith in how everyone fills in the gaps in the mechanism/process of how this is achieved.

[Calm]

I don't look at the "special blessing" in the same way you do....

Indeed, to those who are given much, much is expected. In fact, if one does believe that someone has earned the blessing of being BIC in the pre-existence, then the actual implication of that is because they are given a step up...so to speak...then they would naturally be expected to achieve more...which in LDSspeak means give greater service and obedience to God.

And if instead they choose to wander or outright reject...that just could result in a greater burden for them to overcome than the nonBIC child.

There is no way, imo, that being born in the covenant equates to a 'free pass'. Too many scriptures contradict what is expected of the people of the Covenant. Something else entirely is going on, exactly what is unknown, imo.

After all, everything works out good in the end, and it if it isn't good right now, it isn't the end.

God has given that promise to all men, but it likely works differently for each.

[CMZ]

There is no way, imo, that being born in the covenant equates to a 'free pass'. Too many scriptures contradict what is expected of the people of the Covenant. Something else entirely is going on, exactly what is unknown, imo.

Why people keep wanting to read a 'free pass' into the quotes in question is utterly beyond me.

That's muddied by the priesthood authority thing, so one comes away thinking that because the parent is giving special treatment to the children then God favours them also.

Any priesthood leader who lets somebody (family member or otherwise) "off the hook" when disciplinary action should be taken will be held accountable for the same sin in question.

[LDSBruin]

Why people keep wanting to read a 'free pass' into the quotes in question is utterly beyond me.

Any priesthood leader who lets somebody (family member or otherwise) "off the hook" when disciplinary action should be taken will be held accountable for the same sin in question.

The thread title kind of leads us there. If my parents sealing and good life guarantees them I'll be in the CK, I've received a free pass. Even if I were to suffer the worst life anyone has every had to live, go through the pains of hell and back I'd still call it free simply because it would still all have been just the blink of an eye and entirely inconsequential with regards to the eternal scheme of things.

Now I don't have a problem with the quote being true, but to me that would necessarily imply that everyone could eventually progress to the CK as William James has implied. Personally I think that sounds nice, but I haven't seen any doctrine to support it. Any other way and someone got gypped for having parents that weren't sealed.

[charity]

I never said that. Exaltation is freely available to you.

There's a big point that's still being missed here. Once it's understood everything will clear up.

1. I take your response of, "I never said that" to mean that you agree that: There IS NO GOOD REASON why I, as a child of unsealed parents, should have any less blessing, promise, or God-given advantage than my neighbor whose parents are sealed.

2. Therefore, I take it you are conceding that: Someone whose parents ARE sealed doesn't get anything extra thereby from God.

3. Therefore: Parents who are sealed cannot take comfort in feeling that THEIR children will get any extra attention or help from God than the children of unsealed parents.

Now, please spare me the riddles, and help me figure out the "big point" I'm missing. Thanks.

You are forgetting that our life here didn't start here. We had eons in the pre-mortal existence. There were noble and great ones there. We didn't come here equal. That wouldn't have been fair. But we mortals can't judge what circumstances were better and which weren't. The silver spoon may be more of a curse than a blessing.

It is my opinion that the bottom line is that we have our place on earth in whatever family, country, economic, limiting circumstance, etc. we were placed where we could have the best possible chance at proving ourselves. No one is going to be able to say at the judgement "If only I had been born to that family, or rich, or. . . . I would have made it."

[LDSBruin]

No one is going to be able to say at the judgement "If only I had been born to that family, or rich, or. . . . I would have made it."

I think that is the heart of the matter. We know the Lord is fair and just.

Personally, I'm not aware of any official doctrine that says our situation during earthly life is connected with our performance in the pre-earth life, thus I assume that no one here is going to have the advantage whether earned or otherwise. I could definitely be wrong on that and would be highly interested in sources for such a belief as it is a topic I've considered a lot (having many BIC siblings/relatives that have strayed).

I know there is a lot of speculation, random comments, etc., but I am not aware of anything official.

[Sheelah]

I ran across this last week in studying the sunday school lesson:

Acts 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

Life and Teachings of Jesus and His Apostles

(32-16) Acts 17:26. Was Paul Teaching About the Premortal Existence When He Spoke of the â??Times Before Appointedâ??

Here is an important doctrinal point that squares precisely with that taught by Moses, who speaks of how God divided â??to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam,â? and â??set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.â? (Deuteronomy 32:8.) The doctrinal implication of these scriptures is plain: â??If the Lord appointed unto the nations the bounds of their habitation, then there must have been a selection of spirits to form these nations.â? (Smith, The Way to Perfection, p. 47.) President Harold B. Lee explained further:

â??. . . may I ask each of you again the question, â??Who are you?â?? You are all the sons and daughters of God. Your spirits were created and lived as organized intelligences before the world was. You have been blessed to have a physical body because of your obedience to certain commandments in that premortal state. You are now born into a family to which you have come, into the nations through which you have come, as a reward for the kind of lives you lived before you came here and at a time in the worldâ??s history, as the Apostle Paul taught the men of Athens and as the Lord revealed to Moses, determined by the faithfulness of each of those who lived before this world was created.â? (CR, Oct. 1973, p. 7.)

[LDSBruin]

Thanks. Good quotes.

[CMZ]

I was just about to track down the Harold B. Lee quote then saw that somebody already posted it. Instead of scrutinizing one principle in isolation and branding it FALSE when it doesn't fit your current level of gospel understanding it helps when you put (circumscribe?) it all together.

[LDSBruin]

I was just about to track down the Harold B. Lee quote then saw that somebody already posted it. Instead of scrutinizing one principle in isolation and branding it FALSE when it doesn't fit your current level of gospel understanding it helps when you put (circumscribe?) it all together.

If it helps, I still don't believe a sealing will guarantee anything for anyone.

The reason is this: Everyone is responsible for working out his/her own salvation. (I am currently trying to find doctrinal support for this, but for now I'll just hope you agree with that. Philippians 2:12 can be a good argument for now ) Now if I was valiant in the pre-earth life (I hope I was ), then it still can only be my own actions that qualify me for salvation through Christ's atonement.

Unfortunately, I cannot understand the gospel perfectly and when discussing or making conclusions about such things I can only apply my own limited knowledge. For this reason I am always open to being wrong. I hope nobody is bothered by my opinions.

[CMZ]

Everyone is responsible for working out his/her own salvation.

Yes, I agree (insofar as we are also bringing the atonement of Christ into the equation - an action that somebody else took without which we would become damned souls)! I have never said otherwise.

Remember that the quotes in question are directed to parents. Keep that in mind. Here's the imaginary quote that people here are reacting against:

Hey all you wayward children, malicious hooligans, and juvenile delinquents out there whose parents have been sealed in the temple: Guess what? We have good news for you: your exaltation is absolutely guaranteed! There is nothing you can do to change it. If I were you I'd live it up, spend all your substance on riotous living, and generally flaunt the laws and commandments of God because a simple action your parents took years ago amounts to what may be considered a 'free pass' to exaltation in the good old 'CK.' Don't know what CK is? That's perfectly fine. We don't want to weigh you down with the responsibility of arduous learning of the Gospel so just make a quick mental note that you're heading to a really good place, pretty much the ultimate Bad Boys' Club, the in-crowd of in-crowds. And just so you can give yourself a real big pat on the back for achieving this honor without any effort whatsoever on your part we thought we'd inform you that children whose parents have not been sealed in the temple simply will not be allowed into the CK. No sir, no way. We don't let their kind in no matter how hard they 'work' at it. So, welcome to the club!"

[Rob Osborn]

As far as predestination goes, I have a hard time believing that everyone is in a special condition by their obedience/disobedience in the pre-earth state. Look at Cain- he was very evil and yet was born to the most noblest of parents.

Anyway, in the end everyone who gets saved from Satan will have had all their temple work performed for them including all of the sealing work so it really is not an issue of one having an advantage over another just because they were born in the covenant as everyone will be a covenant people in the end anyway and it is only then that the sealing covenants really have any reward in eternity. Think about all of the myriads of couples who have departed life without a temple sealing. Does this mean that their relationship is null and void in the spirit world? That would be unfair just as it would also be unfair if their children were no longer theirs either. The family relationship continues after death.

As for wayward children who were born into the covenant, I think it is a false doctrine to believe that these children fall under a different set of rules or laws. In the real spiritual sense, all of us who came to this earth came as special spiritual children belonging to the kingdom of god. As such, we are all given gifts to help us in our journey through life. All of us have the precious gift of the light of Christ within us. We all are sheep and belong to the fold of God. Some of us are lost sheep (sinneres) but Christ the shepherd, came into the world to find the lost sheep- to save that which was otherwise apparently lost. In the end Christ saves all of the works of the Fathers hands except for the sons of perdition who wish not to be saved and thus cannot be saved.

There is no such thing as guarenteed salvation for children just because they were born in the covenant. All the covenant guarentees them is that they will continue to be sealed to their respective families by keeping the commandments of which include individual works such as repentance and baptism once they become accountable and sin. So there really is no advantage of children born in the covenant to those born out of the covenant other than the first has a quicker opportunity to become saved whereas the second will have to become converted to the truth first and then receive the same eternal blessing as the first- (the parable of the laborers in the vineyard).

[docwatson223]

sooner or later they will feel the tentacles of Divine Providence reaching out after them

Hopefully not these!