I'm Confused About The 3 Levels Of The Celestial Kingdom

[Calm]

Really?  Imagine you have a loving relationship with a man for 5 years, no children.  He dies and you remarry and you have a wonderful relationship with another man for 60 years, including having a number of children with him.
 
Don't you think the woman would be torn between who she should be sealed with?  The man she loved in her youth or the man who stayed by her and endured to the end, raised children with her, etc.

PS: there are a number of men who refuse to date a widow because they want to be sealed to their wives…and yet no widower has to face that choice unless his potential wife refuses to share him…hmmm….

Edited August 3, 2014 by calmoriah

[JAHS]

Really?  Imagine you have a loving relationship with a man for 5 years, no children.  He dies and you remarry and you have a wonderful relationship with another man for 60 years, including having a number of children with him.

 

Don't you think the woman would be torn between who she should be sealed with?  The man she loved in her youth or the man who stayed by her and endured to the end, raised children with her, etc.

But she doesn't know she will be with him for 60 years when she marries him.  What if the second one she marries also dies within a few years?  Does she do it over again? In my opinion she sticks with the first one, gets married for time only with the second one (which he would have to agree to) and sometime in the next life (millennium) he can be sealed to someone else. There has to be some kind of order. We are all sealed together in God's big family in heaven anyway.

[Garden Girl]

It must feel horrible though if you're a husband and you die, and then your wife cancels your sealing. That must be a slap in the face.

 

VGJ... cancellation of sealings is a very serious matter, and has to be approved by the First Presidency.  There has to be a very good reason for a sealing to be cancelled, i.e., one spouse broke their covenants, abused the other, etc.  Even with that, people just can't cancel sealings willy-nilly.  Each cancellation request is reviewed at the FP level, and sometimes takes months to get approved. 

 

GG

[Calm]

But she doesn't know she will be with him for 60 years when she marries him. What if the second one she marries also dies within a few years? Does she do it over again? In my opinion she sticks with the first one, gets married for time only with the second one (which he would have to agree to) and sometime in the next life (millennium) he can be sealed to someone else. There has to be some kind of order. We are all sealed together in God's big family in heaven anyway.

Perhaps after they start having children she reconsiders and then desires to change her sealing.

For myself, I likely would have a cancellation and be sealed to the father of my children because I think it would be highly confusing in church for the children to be taught they can be with Mom and Dad eternally only to come home and find out that isn't how it is going to work, they are instead going to be taken from their dad and forced to live with a total stranger (from the kids' POV).

I feel bad for any family in that situation and applaud any solution they choose to work things out for them.

That is if an appeal to be allowed to have a second sealing as is now done for some reason is refused.

If it is no big deal to be sealed to the woman you've been married to for 60 years and had children with, then why not have men cancel their sealings as well save to one woman to keep things orderly?

After all, given Jacob it would appear that monogamy is the default marriage situation doctrinally.

How is it any more orderly for a man to be sealed to children who are not his biologically and who never knew him in this life, never were cared for by him, never had any involvement with naming or blessing them or even just giving them a hug and for the man who fathered them legally with their mother and did all those things and so much more to have no covenental relationship with them any more than ward members sitting in the next pew?

Edited August 3, 2014 by calmoriah

[Bikeemikey]

I'm confused how someone could be worthy of the lowest level of the Celestial Kingdom and make the kingdom, but not worthy enough to be in the top of the Celestial Kingdom or the 2nd level. I understand that those in the lower and 2nd level of the Celestial Kingdom are not sealed through marriage, but you can be sealed in the next life if you never got a chance on earth, yet there are many ministering angels who are not exalted. If a member is worthy of the CK, shouldn't they easily go to the top?

We have no idea.

[Tacenda]

I think the bigger question is what it means for "eternal family" as taught as one of the pillars of Church doctrine.  If I can be sealed to 3 wives and each wife can be sealed to 3 husbands who in turn have 3 wives and we can all have children together, well, you can see the confusion it would bring to God's kingdom of order.  And family would cease to mean anything beyond membership in one giant sealed mass of people who can all reproduce with each other...

For the hundredth time, that's why Jesus said there is no marriage in heaven.  But no one who's LDS will agree because it would change their theology completely.  So no need to respond, because it's an old argument with no evidence other than His words.   

[Garden Girl]

For the hundredth time, that's why Jesus said there is no marriage in heaven.  But no one who's LDS will agree because it would change their theology completely.  So no need to respond, because it's an old argument with no evidence other than His words.   

 

For the hundredth time, Jesus did not say there is no marriage in heaven...  read the scripture again...

 

GG

[Tacenda]

For the hundredth time, Jesus did not say there is no marriage in heaven...  read the scripture again...

 

GG

Matthew 22:30  

For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven

 

 

GG, does this only apply to a certain few then?  I'm willing to admit, I don't "do" scriptures very well.  And when I think of angels...they aren't playing a harp. 

[JAHS]

Perhaps after they start having children she reconsiders and then desires to change her sealing.

For myself, I likely would have a cancellation and be sealed to the father of my children because I think it would be highly confusing in church for the children to be taught they can be with Mom and Dad eternally only to come home and find out that isn't how it is going to work, they are instead going to be taken from their dad and forced to live with a total stranger (from the kids' POV).

I feel bad for any family in that situation and applaud any solution they choose to work things out for them.

That is if an appeal to be allowed to have a second sealing as is now done for some reason is refused.

If it is no big deal to be sealed to the woman you've been married to for 60 years and had children with, then why not have men cancel their sealings as well save to one woman to keep things orderly?

After all, given Jacob it would appear that monogamy is the default marriage situation doctrinally.

How is it any more orderly for a man to be sealed to children who are not his biologically and who never knew him in this life, never were cared for by him, never had any involvement with naming or blessing them or even just giving them a hug and for the man who fathered them legally with their mother and did all those things and so much more to have no covenental relationship with them any more than ward members sitting in the next pew?

There's only one covenental relationship regardless of who we are sealed to. For the children, they will be sealed to and be with their own spouses in eternity. We are all God's children and brothers and sisters to all who obtain eternal life. I think only God is the one who will be able to make sense of it all for us.

[JAHS]

Matthew 22:30  

For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven

 

 

GG, does this only apply to a certain few then?  I'm willing to admit, I don't "do" scriptures very well.  And when I think of angels...they aren't playing a harp. 

 

Actually He only said this once although it was recorded in both Matthew and Luke:

 

23 "The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him, 

24 Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.

25 Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother: 

26 Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. 

27 And last of all the woman died also. 

28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. 

29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 

30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." (Matt 22:23-30)

 

The key in this is understanding that Jesus was only refering to civil marriages in these scriptures. The Saducees were trying to trap Jesus with this question. Since they did not believe in the resurrection(verse 23), neither did they believe in marriage for eternity; and they thought there could be no suitable answer to their question. The very fact that they asked the question indicates that the doctrine of marriage for eternity was taught(verse 28) and accepted by those who were not of their particular faith. Otherwise they never would have presented the question to the Savior. Christ, knowing they only believed in civil marriages, explained that such a marriage contract as they presented, would be fulfilled and ended at death and that all such people would be as the angels in Heaven, no longer married. And once a person dies they could not become married after the resurrection in heaven. The marriage must be performed here on earth, in this life. 

However, Jesus also said regarding marriage:

 

"And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." (Matt 19:5-6)

 

If we say death separates us then we are putting it asunder.

[JLHPROF]

For the hundredth time, that's why Jesus said there is no marriage in heaven.  But no one who's LDS will agree because it would change their theology completely.  So no need to respond, because it's an old argument with no evidence other than His words.   

 

Christ didn't say that at all.  That is a complete scriptural misread, not even arguable.

 

Christ said there are no "weddings" in heaven.  Our entire existence is based around marriage into eternity.  But we have to decide during this creation where we want to be during the next one.

[JLHPROF]

A lot of people feel that way about a man being able to have more than one wife. They see it as diminishing the idea of a family not to have two unique parents to each one.

If a perfect society can handle a family with more than one mother, I suspect it can handle an interwoven network of parents as well as not.

 

It is about family kingdoms, and scripturally each man receives his kindgom with his wife (or wives) and posterity as members of his Kingdom as he is a member of God's kingdom.  That is in the scriptures, the temple, the teachings of the prophets.  It is downplayed now but the organization of the Kingdom of God has never been revealed to be any different.

I don't say that a perfect society can't handle "an interwoven network of parents", but that in such a situation it would be chaos, not order and no longer be a "perfect society".

But having read your example I completely understand why you choose to believe as you do.  I personally believe the doctrine espoused by the prophet Joseph when he told Hyrum to marry Mercy Thompson.

 

Edited August 3, 2014 by JLHPROF

[Calm]

"But having read your story I completely understand why you choose to believe as you do"

I don't think you understand my actual position.

What do you think is "my story"?

[JLHPROF]

"But having read your story I completely understand why you choose to believe as you do"

I don't think you understand my actual position.

What do you think is "my story"?

 

My apologies.  I should have said "your example", not your story.  I will fix it.  I meant no personal implication.

Your example was:

 

 

Really?  Imagine you have a loving relationship with a man for 5 years, no children.  He dies and you remarry and you have a wonderful relationship with another man for 60 years, including having a number of children with him.

 

Don't you think the woman would be torn between who she should be sealed with?  The man she loved in her youth or the man who stayed by her and endured to the end, raised children with her, etc.

 

AND

 

Perhaps after they start having children she reconsiders and then desires to change her sealing.

For myself, I likely would have a cancellation and be sealed to the father of my children because I think it would be highly confusing in church for the children to be taught they can be with Mom and Dad eternally only to come home and find out that isn't how it is going to work, they are instead going to be taken from their dad and forced to live with a total stranger (from the kids' POV).

I feel bad for any family in that situation and applaud any solution they choose to work things out for them.

 

I see why the old standard teaching on the subject would trouble people in this example.  But I don't think the recent "just seal them both and God will figure it out" is really correct either.

[Calm]

I believe the teachings of kingdoms is an approximation to the reality which is so far beyond our current mortal understanding that God must resort to such limited concepts.

How can we be truly one with God and yet have separate kingdoms from him? How can we be truly one and yet one has dominion over another? How can a man and woman be truly one and yet that man is also truly one with another woman and yet for some reason a woman can't be truly one in marriage with another man....even while being truly one with all the other men in the CK.

The sealings have eternal meaning IMO, it is not just going to be mix and match as is implied by some when they talk about how sealings don't matter really for women and their children. If the sealings have eternal significance in one relationship, it will be for others.

[Thinking]

I personally have known two women who have had sealings cancelled who have gone on to be  sealed to a new husband.  They leave the sealing in place until such time as that woman is approved for the cancellation and new marriage. 

 

GG

 

My sister was married in the temple and bore 5 children in the covenant. She and her first husband later divorced. Her sealing was cancelled when she was ready to be sealed to another man.

 

Do her children remain sealed to her and her first husband?

[wenglund]

JLHPROF, what about someone like me, a 28 year old single and I want to be married, but what if I don't find someone in this life? Do I get to find someone in the spirit world before the resurrection happens? And how can polygamy be the only way to become gods if the church doesn't allow polygamy on this earth?

 

If it is of any comfort, many of my friends from when I attended older singles wards back in the day got married after the age of 28, some well after that age, and this was when the average age for marriage for our generation was much closer to 21 than it is nowadays.

 

If you would like some pointers on what not to do in trying to get married, let me know. I am well experienced in that area.  

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Tacenda]

Christ didn't say that at all. That is a complete scriptural misread, not even arguable.

Christ said there are no "weddings" in heaven. Our entire existence is based around marriage into eternity. But we have to decide during this creation where we want to be during the next one.

I haven't read down the thread, it might have been answered, but why does he say we would be angels, not gods or goddesses of our own world? Edited August 3, 2014 by Tacenda

[JLHPROF]

I haven't read down the thread, it might have been answered, but why does he say we would be angels, not gods or goddesses of our own world?

 

I don't think Christ explains.  But D&C 132 does.

 

 

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.

 

Quite simply put - no spouse = no kids here AND no eternal partner to have spirit children with (different from those with fertility issues). 

No kids = no kingdom to rule over as Gods/Goddesses.

 

You cannot be a single person and be exalted.  It is an oxymoron.  And as both Christ & D&C 132 say you have to have the marriage ceremony performed during this creation (not necessarily before you die, but while there is someone mortal to be sealed on your behalf, so before the resurrection/winding up scene).  As Brigham Young taught you have to accept this blessing if God offers you.  If you reject a blessing you may reach a stage where you can no longer obtain it.

[Garden Girl]

Matthew 22:30  

For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven

 

 

GG, does this only apply to a certain few then?  I'm willing to admit, I don't "do" scriptures very well.  And when I think of angels...they aren't playing a harp. 

 

Hello Tacenda...

Two things... 1 Cor. 11:11... "Nevertheless, neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord."

 

Matt 16;19... "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

 

In other words, l Cor. tells us that the man and woman are not without each other, in the Lord.

 

And in Matt. this can be accomplished because of the "keys" of heaven, given to Peter... those keys have been  restored to the earth and rest with the Pres of the Church through the priesthood... and the restoration of the sealing power in the temple, because whatever is bound on earth by priesthood authority and the sealing keys, is also bound in heaven.

 

The great work of the millenium will be temple work prior to resurrection/final judgment.  Those who choose not to be sealed (bound) will be ministering angels...

D&C 132:15-17... "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 in 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.

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...

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."

 

Tacenda... there is a big difference between your statement that Jesus said "there was no marriage in heaven" and what the scripturres actually do say...

 

GG

 

NOTE TO JLHPROF...  Sorry, I was typing when you were posting your response above... we overlap...didn't notice you had already quoted...  although I also included 1 Cor. and Matt 16...

Edited August 3, 2014 by Garden Girl

[Calm]

Remember that marrying and being given in marriage is talking about an event, a wedding, not the ongoing eternal marriage. People go into the resurrected state as one with their spouse or as one on their own (though of course they still experience that oneness with God) and at that point on, there is no change in the marriage state, they are either eternally married or unmarried because that is their desire on how they want to live eternally.

[VideoGameJunkie]

All great advice. I made this thread because being exalted in the Celestial Kingdom and having an eternal companion is the most important thing to me, and I hope I get sealed in the temple to a wife before I die.

[BCSpace]

I'm confused how someone could be worthy of the lowest level of the Celestial Kingdom and make the kingdom, but not worthy enough to be in the top of the Celestial Kingdom or the 2nd level. I understand that those in the lower and 2nd level of the Celestial Kingdom are not sealed through marriage, but you can be sealed in the next life if you never got a chance on earth, yet there are many ministering angels who are not exalted. If a member is worthy of the CK, shouldn't they easily go to the top?

 

Did a search on "131" in this thread and didn't see it.  So in case it hasn't been mentioned, D&C 131 tells us that a man cannot enter the highest degree in the CK unless he is married under the new and everlasting covenant.  Of course that doesn't explain all three CK degrees.  Some postulate that the lowest is not sealed to a spouse, the middle is monogamously sealed, and the highest is plurally sealed.  Interesting, but unsupported by doctrine as far as I can tell except that it acknowledges the reality that plural marriage is part of LDS doctrine.

[VideoGameJunkie]

BC, then how can we achieve exaltation if plural marriage isn't allowed anymore?

[BCSpace]

BC, then how can we achieve exaltation if plural marriage isn't allowed anymore?

 

Who said plural sealings are not allowed anymore or that previous plural sealings are of no effect?  I wouldn't worry too much about it as the postulation is not supported by doctrine as reasonable as it sounds.

Edited August 3, 2014 by BCSpace