June Ensign - Life After Death

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

Like I said above I'm pretty sure you would not be strangers there in the lower kingdoms, but the marriage contract itself would no longer have any meaning when you are no longer on earth. It would be as if you had only a civil "till death do you part" marriage. 

Well that sounds a little better..

[sunstoned]

14 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I am a widow, and ex-mormon.  That puts this theology in a hurtful place for me.  I live life with a longing to be with him again.

Don't be troubled by any exclusionary doctrines.  If there is a god and that god is a loving god, then we will be with our loved ones.  No parent would deny their children happiness. 

[Kenngo1969]

Any judgments that are necessary will be in the hands of a perfectly-just, perfectly-merciful, all-wise, all-knowing, all-loving Father in Heaven.  I trust Him to make those judgments, because, conversely, my capacity for justice, for mercy, for wisdom, for knowledge, and for love, are limited in comparison to His.  I don't think the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is going to jettison Doctrine and Covenants 132 anytime soon.  However unlikely, God could make decisions that, as someone who possesses those qualities to a limited degree, I don't think are "fair," but God is a Sovereign.  He will deal with each of us "as seemeth Him good."  We can stomp our widdo feet and shake our widdo fists at how "unfair" the Sovereign Lord of the Universe is being in any individual case, but what's the point?

In some respects, God isn't all that different from my Earthly parents: if I wanted something from them, often, they made the granting of that wish contingent on my meeting some specified condition.  It was rare that they granted any wish without my first having complied with whatever condition they set, and that "exception" often was greeted with a hearty hue and cry from others who thought it unfair.  I'm not sure why we expect God to operate any differently.  As I just mentioned on another thread, my sister-in-law passed away this morning.  While I wasn't in attendance at her sealing to my brother nearly 26 years ago (I was serving as a missionary at the time), I have been in attendance at several other sealings.  The hope I have for her and for her family notwithstanding of her untimely passing stems in large part from the covenants that she and my brother made that day.  As I say, God will deal "as seemeth Him good" with others who have not made such covenants (which is a big part of what proxy ordinances are all about).

While I don't want to be unsympathetic to others who have not made such covenants, or to those who no longer attach the significance to them that I do, neither am I prepared to say (and, if you'll pardon me, I'm especially not prepared to say in light of her passing this morning) that those covenants mean nothing.

[JLHPROF]

34 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Don't be troubled by any exclusionary doctrines.  If there is a god and that god is a loving god, then we will be with our loved ones.  No parent would deny their children happiness. 

Yeah, about that.
Not sure what Disney version of God you've been reading about, but that doesn't match any description of God found in scripture.
Quite the opposite in fact.

[The Nehor]

50 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Don't be troubled by any exclusionary doctrines.  If there is a god and that god is a loving god, then we will be with our loved ones.  No parent would deny their children happiness. 

Unless said child refused said happiness or said happiness was a torment to said child.

[smac97]

On 6/5/2016 at 4:39 PM, Broker said:

This month's Ensign has an article about life after death that ends with this:

"What will people do in the other kingdoms?

Those in other kingdoms will be angels, which “are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory” (D&C 132:16). They will not be married or have spirit offspring (see D&C 131:1–4; 132:16–17)."

I'm not sure the Church currently teaches this as doctrine, so I was a bit surprised to see it in an Ensign article.

I think you are incorrect on this last point.  The Church has always taught, and never ceased from teaching, that marriage in the eternities is available for all of God's children, but only in the Celestial Kingdom.  The interchangeability of "eternal marriage" with "celestial marriage" . . . the tying together of the concepts of "exaltation" in the Celestial Kingdom and eternal marriage . . . the reality of eternal families existing and continuing only in the Celestial Kingdom . . . all of these concepts are found throughout LDS writings.  There is, AFAICS, no basis whatsoever in the LDS canon for the notion that eternal marriages/families will exist in any kingdom but the Celestial.  Consider the following:

1. Scriptures:

D&C 132 is the principal source of doctrine about eternal marriage.  In it are key provisions that establish, beyond reasonable dispute, that eternal marriage only exists in the Celestial Kingdom (emphases added):

• Verse 7: And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.
• Verse 13: And everything that is in the world, whether it be ordained of men, by thrones, or principalities, or powers, or things of name, whatsoever they may be, that are not by me or by my word, saith the Lord, shall be thrown down, and shall not remain after men are dead, neither in nor after the resurrection, saith the Lord your God.
• Verse 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.
• Verses 16-17: 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.  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.
• Verse 18: And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife, and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity, if that covenant is not by me or by my word, which is my law, and is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, through him whom I have anointed and appointed unto this power, then it is not valid neither of force when they are out of the world, because they are not joined by me, saith the Lord, neither by my word; when they are out of the world it cannot be received there, because the angels and the gods are appointed there, by whom they cannot pass; they cannot, therefore, inherit my glory; for my house is a house of order, saith the Lord God.
• Verse 19: And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood ... and if ye abide in my covenant ...  it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
• Verses 20-21: Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.  Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory.

D&C 131 also has some core doctrinal provisions:

• 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 everlasting covenant of marriage];
• 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 increase.

2. Missionary Lessons and Manuals

In chapter 5 the "Preach My Gospel" manual, there are several references to the "celestial" nature of eternal marriage (emphases added):

Quote

 

Eternal Marriage

The basic unit of the Church is the family. Within the family, people experience many of life’s greatest joys and sorrows. Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and is central to God’s eternal plan for the salvation of His children. The means by which mortal life is created is divinely appointed and is safeguarded by marriage. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to endure beyond the grave. Marriage, however, can be eternal only when authorized priesthood holders perform the sealing ordinance in sacred temples and when husbands and wives who have been sealed together keep the covenants they have made. Husbands and wives are to love each other. As they keep the commandments and live gospel principles, they are to honor their marital vows with complete fidelity (see “The Family: A Proclamation to the World,” Ensign, Nov. 1995, 102; see also D&C 42:22).

...

Temples and Family History

God has commanded His people to build temples. In the temple we make sacred covenants and are endowed with, or are given, a gift of power and knowledge from on high. This power helps us in our daily lives and enables us to build God’s kingdom. In the temple we can also be married for time and eternity, thus making it possible for families to be together forever in God’s presence. After at least one year of membership, worthy adults may be eligible to receive from their bishop a recommend to receive their own endowment. After receiving their endowments, married couples may be sealed or married for eternity.

 

In chapter 38 of the "Gospel Principles" manual, there are several references to the "celestial" nature of eternal marriage (emphases added):

• Heavenly Father has given us the law of eternal marriage so we can become like Him. The Lord has said: “In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees; “And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage]; “And if he does not, he cannot obtain it” (D&C 131:1–3).

• Many people in the world consider marriage to be only a social custom, a legal agreement between a man and a woman to live together. But to Latter-day Saints, marriage is much more. Our exaltation depends on marriage, along with other principles and ordinances, such as faith, repentance, baptism, and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost. We believe that marriage is the most sacred relationship that can exist between a man and a woman. This sacred relationship affects our happiness now and in the eternities.

• An eternal marriage must be performed by one who holds the sealing power. The Lord promised, “If a man marry a wife by … the new and everlasting covenant … by him who is anointed, … and if [they] abide in [the Lord’s] covenant, … it … shall be of full force when they are out of the world” (D&C 132:19).  Not only must an eternal marriage be performed by the proper priesthood authority, but it must also be done in one of the holy temples of our Lord. The temple is the only place this holy ordinance can be performed.

• If we are married by any authority other than by the priesthood in a temple, the marriage is for this life only. After death, the marriage partners have no claim on each other or on their children. An eternal marriage gives us the opportunity to continue as families after this life.
• Benefits of an Eternal Marriage . . . We can live in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom of God.

In the "Eternal Marriage Student Manual" published by the Church, there are several references to the "celestial" nature of eternal marriage (emphases added):

• President Joseph Fielding Smith . . . “The family is the most important organization in time or in eternity. Our purpose in life is to create for ourselves eternal family units. There is nothing that will ever come into your family life that is as important as the sealing blessings of the temple and then keeping the covenants made in connection with this order of celestial marriage” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1972, 13; or Ensign, July 1972, 27).
• Elder Henry B. Eyring . . . There is only one place where there will be families—the highest degree of the celestial kingdom. That is where we will want to be.
• Elder Bruce R. McConkie . . . “The whole aim and purpose of the gospel is to enable men and women—united as one in the Lord—to create for themselves eternal family units in eternity. Celestial marriage prepares us for the greatest joy and happiness known to mortals and for eternal life in the realms ahead” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1979, 82; or Ensign, Nov. 1979, 55).
• Elder Bruce R. McConkie . . . “Marriages performed in the temples for time and eternity, by virtue of the sealing keys restored by Elijah, are called celestial marriages. The participating parties become husband and wife in this mortal life, and if after their marriage they keep all the terms and conditions of this order of the priesthood, they continue on as husband and wife in the celestial kingdom of God."
• President Spencer W. Kimball . . . Remember: “Neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.” [1 Corinthians 11:11]  No one can reject this covenant (of celestial marriage) and reach the eternal kingdom of God. This is certain.  “In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees; And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage]; And if he does not, he cannot obtain it.  He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom.” [D&C 131:1–4] “For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned.” [D&C 132:4]  And damned means stopped in progress.  These are the words of the Lord. They were said directly to us. There is no question about them.
• President Harold B. Lee . . .  {O}nly those who enter into the new and everlasting covenant of marriage in the temple for time and eternity, only those will have the exaltation in the celestial kingdom. That is what the Lord tells us” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1973, 120; or Ensign, Jan. 1974, 100).
• Our attitudes toward these questions are dictated by gospel doctrines we know to be true . . . Our eternal destiny—exaltation in the celestial kingdom—is made possible only through the atonement of Jesus Christ (through which we became and can remain “innocent before God” [D&C 93:38]) and is only available to a man and a woman who have entered into and been faithful to the covenants of an eternal marriage in a temple of God (see D&C 131:1–4; 132).
• Because of God’s great love for his children, even the worst sinners (or almost all of them) will ultimately be rewarded with assignment to a kingdom of glory. Persons who have lived good lives and received most of the ordinances of salvation but have failed to qualify for exaltation through eternal marriage will be saved in a lesser place in the celestial kingdom where there is no eternal increase (see D&C 131:1–4).

See also lesson 19 in the "Foundations of the Restoration Teacher Manual, 2015" manual, Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual, (2002), 327–334, chapter 28 in the "Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual, (2000)" manual, and many, many more.

3. Other Sources

In The Encyclopedia of Mormonism, there are several references to the "celestial" nature of eternal marriage (emphases added):

• Becoming like God is dependent to a large extent on entering into "celestial marriage" for "time and all eternity," for eventually all exalted beings shall have entered into this highest patriarchal order of the priesthood. Latter-day Saints believe that the marital and family bond can continue in the post-earth life, and indeed is necessary for eternal life, or life in the Celestial Kingdom with God the Father; Mother in Heaven; Jesus Christ, and other glorified beings.
• Given the necessity of marrying another Latter-day Saint in a temple to achieve the greatest happiness in this life and exaltation in the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom hereafter, one would expect that Mormons in general, and active Latter-day Saints in particular, would have lower rates of interfaith marriages than members of other faiths or those with no affiliation.
• Latter-day Saints believe that life is more secure and more joyous when it is experienced in the sacred relationships of the eternal family. Those who maintain such worthy relationships on earth will live as families in the Celestial Kingdom following the resurrection. 
• Eternal marriage is a covenant, a sacred promise that a wife and a husband make with each other and with God, attested to by both mortal witnesses and heavenly angels. Under proper conditions such marriages are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, and the couple, through their faithfulness, can eventually inherit exaltation and glory in the Celestial Kingdom of God (D&C 132:19). The scriptures confirm that eternal marriage, performed by the authority of the priesthood, sealed or affirmed by the Holy Ghost, and sustained by a righteous life, "shall be of full force" after death (D&C 132:19; cf. 1 Cor. 11:11).

There are also many, many references on the LDS.org to "eternal marriage" as being "celestial marriage" (such as "What the Church Teaches about Marriage").

This is a core doctrine of the Church.  It is taught and emphasized constantly in church meetings, in seminaries and institutes, in missionary discussions, in General Conference talks, and so on.

Quote

I know past Church leaders have made such statements, but current Church leaders seem to be (wisely) staying away from teaching doctrines that are not fully understood. (e.g. "As God once was...." or doctrinal reasons for withholding the priesthood). 

I don't think the Brethren are "staying away" from the concept that eternal marriages are only available in the Celestial Kingdom.  Again, Celestial Marriage is a core doctrine in the Church, and one that it taught all the time.

Quote

The scriptures cited in the article are about marriage in the Celestial Kingdom, but say nothing directly about couples that may not qualify for the Celestial Kingdom, but have been sealed in the temple (perhaps vicariously).

We have ample guidance from the scriptures and from modern prophets and apostles about celestial marriage, the efficacy of the sealing ordinance, the importance of living such that the marriage is "sealed" by the Holy Spirit of Promise, and so on.

If you are angling for a proposition that the LDS paradigm teaches that eternal marriages are available outside of the Celestial Kingdom, then - with respect - I think you are setting yourself up for a real disappointment.  But it's also an unnecessary one.  It's not like we teach that there is a limited number of slots in the Celestial Kingdom, and that the only people who get there will be picked at random or in some heavenly lottery.  That's not what we believe.  Exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom - and the blessing of eternal marriage that is inherent in it - is available to all of us if we choose it.

Quote

I find it difficult to accept that Church leaders can constantly, and with increasing volume, teach about the importance of marriage (and not just to Church members, but to all people) on one hand, while on the other hand believing that most of those marriages won't last beyond death because people won't qualify for the Celestial Kingdom.

I'm not sure I understand your point.  The Savior himself said that "strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."  Do you take exception to that?

The Restored Gospel of the LDS Church is one of remarkable hope and promise.  Instead of a dichotomous "Heaven or Hell" eschatology, we belief that the vast majority of the children of God will inherit a kingdom of glory, all of which are far and way more glorious that our present condition.  I am grateful for that.

Quote

No where have I seen current Church leaders warn people that God will tear their marriages apart unless they join the Church. I think they don't teach that, because it's a doctrine we don't completely understand.

Yours is an unfair and highly inaccurate characterization of God's plan for us.  The Plan of Salvation is not about tearing families apart, but rather about saving them from their otherwise inevitable expiration.

You seem to be under the impression that marriages are innately eternal until and unless God steps in to - as you so inaccurately put it - "tear {them} ... apart."  That is not the way of things.  Marriages are innately temporary until and unless God steps in to preserve them into the eternities.  That is what the Latter-day Saints believe, and I am happy and grateful for this teaching.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited June 6, 2016 by smac97

[Bobbieaware]

15 hours ago, Broker said:

This month's Ensign has an article about life after death that ends with this:

"What will people do in the other kingdoms?

Those in other kingdoms will be angels, which “are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory” (D&C 132:16). They will not be married or have spirit offspring (see D&C 131:1–4; 132:16–17)."

I'm not sure the Church currently teaches this as doctrine, so I was a bit surprised to see it in an Ensign article. I know past Church leaders have made such statements, but current Church leaders seem to be (wisely) staying away from teaching doctrines that are not fully understood. (e.g. "As God once was...." or doctrinal reasons for withholding the priesthood). 

The scriptures cited in the article are about marriage in the Celestial Kingdom, but say nothing directly about couples that may not qualify for the Celestial Kingdom, but have been sealed in the temple (perhaps vicariously).

I find it difficult to accept that Church leaders can constantly, and with increasing volume, teach about the importance of marriage (and not just to Church members, but to all people) on one hand, while on the other hand believing that most of those marriages won't last beyond death because people won't qualify for the Celestial Kingdom. No where have I seen current Church leaders warn people that God will tear their marriages apart unless they join the Church. I think they don't teach that, because it's a doctrine we don't completely understand.

Opinions ?

 

 

There is a passage in the Family Proclamation that I believe is of critical importance to the discussion on this thread. This is what it says:

"Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose."

If the above portion of the proclamation is accepted at face value, it appears to indicate that even in the lower kingdoms of glory there is an important purpose behind there being both males and females. It seems likely that the lower kingdoms of glory are not merely "unisex neuter world," where there is no meaningful difference between men and women, because there is an eternal purpose informing the wisdom that lies behind the continuation of male and female identities in the eternities. How the two sexes interact and relate to each other in the lower kingdoms, in order to bring about God's eternal purposes, has not yet been revealed. But I'm quite sure twe will learn one day that the inhabitants of the three kingdoms of glory work in concert with each other, in specific male/female rolls, and this in order to fulfill God's eternal purposes.

Also, if we're resurrected anatomically correct, and not like  Barbie and Ken dolls, it's hard for me to imagine the resurrected sexual organs will forever remain sterile and merely vestigial. It also seems hard to believe that men and women will not continue to be attracted to each other in the eternal worlds. Bottom line? there is surely a wise and glorious purpose that lies behind why we will forever remain either males or females.

 

Edited June 6, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[Scott Lloyd]

15 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

There is a passage in the Family Proclamation that I believe is of critical importance to this thread.This is what it says:

"Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose."

If the above portion of the proclamation is accepted at face value, it appears to indicate that even in the lower kingdoms of glory there is an important purpose behind there being both males and females. It seems likely that the lower kingdoms of glory are not merely unisex neuter world's, where there is no meaningful difference between men and women, because there is an eternal purpose informing the wisdom that lies behind the creation of both males and females. How the two sexes interact and relate to each other in the lower kingdoms, to bring about God's eternal purposes, has not yet been revealed. But I'm quite sure that we will one day learn that the inhabitants of the three kingdoms of glory work in concert with each other, in specific male/female rolls, in order to fulfill God's eternal purposes.

 

I see the "eternal identity and purpose" referred to here as pertaining to exaltation as families in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom. That is the purposes for which we are placed on earth, and all teachings of the Lord through His prophets and Church are directed toward that end goal.

There is no menu of options available for those who don't quite have the energy and drive to aim for exaltation and have decided to shoot for something less. We were not placed here to fail.

The teachings are quite clear: Those who fall short will be ministering angels to those worthy of a far greater weight of glory -- just as has been expressed repeatedly and continues to be expressed in gospel teachings. Smac, on this thread, has presented an exceptional brief pertaining to this doctrine.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, Broker said:

This month's Ensign has an article about life after death that ends with this:

"What will people do in the other kingdoms?

Those in other kingdoms will be angels, which “are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory” (D&C 132:16). They will not be married or have spirit offspring (see D&C 131:1–4; 132:16–17)."

I'm not sure the Church currently teaches this as doctrine, so I was a bit surprised to see it in an Ensign article. I know past Church leaders have made such statements, but current Church leaders seem to be (wisely) staying away from teaching doctrines that are not fully understood. (e.g. "As God once was...." or doctrinal reasons for withholding the priesthood). 

The scriptures cited in the article are about marriage in the Celestial Kingdom, but say nothing directly about couples that may not qualify for the Celestial Kingdom, but have been sealed in the temple (perhaps vicariously).

I find it difficult to accept that Church leaders can constantly, and with increasing volume, teach about the importance of marriage (and not just to Church members, but to all people) on one hand, while on the other hand believing that most of those marriages won't last beyond death because people won't qualify for the Celestial Kingdom. No where have I seen current Church leaders warn people that God will tear their marriages apart unless they join the Church. I think they don't teach that, because it's a doctrine we don't completely understand.

Opinions ?

You may find it difficult to accept, but that has been standard LDS doctrine all along.  Nothing odd or strange about it at all.

[Bobbieaware]

4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I see the "eternal identity and purpose" referred to here as pertaining to exaltation as families in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom. That is the purposes for which we are placed on earth, and all teachings of the Lord through His prophets and Church are directed toward that end goal.

There is no menu of options available for those who don't quite have the energy and drive to aim for exaltation and have decided to shoot for something less. We were not placed here to fail.

The teachings are quite clear: Those who fall short will be ministering angels to those worthy of a far greater weight of glory -- just as has been expressed repeatedly and continues to be expressed in gospel teachings. Smac, on this thread, has presented an exceptional brief pertaining to this doctrine.

I see your point, but I don't know that it negates my point  My point is one of SPECULATIVE theology, a theology that acknowledges D&C 76 when it says 

114 But great and marvelous are the works of the Lord, and the mysteries of his kingdom which he showed unto us, which surpass all understanding in glory, and in might, and in dominion;

 115 Which he commanded us we should not write while we were yet in the Spirit, and are not lawful for man to utter; (D&C 76)

If our present scriptures contained all the information there is to know about everything that lies ahead in futurity, I would agree with you. But the above two verses testify that there is much in futurity about which we are still very much in the dark. You see, if a man remains a man and a woman remains a woman for ten trillion post-resurrection aeons, and that's only just the beginning of the beginning of eternity, it seems ludicrous to me that there would be any good reason for men to remain men and women to remain women. If there isn't some good purpose for men to remain men and women to remain women, other than to serve as a constant reminder of lost purpose and opportunity, what good purpose does it serve? Knowing about the Lord's divine economy causes me to think such a condition is illogical and amounts to nothing more than a tragic and unnecessary waste. Now if you tell me that in the lower kingdoms men no longer remain men and women no longer remain women, but that they lose all gender identification in the resurrection and become sexless, then I would find it easier to agree with you. But in light of the following, this seems highly unlikely.

 23 The soul shall be restored to the body, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things (and I presume this includes the sexual organs and all the 'plumbing' associated with those organs) shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame. (Alma 40)

The canon of LDS scripture revealed thus far is only the tip of a very large iceberg of Gospel knowledge. And based on some of the things Joseph Smith said about the many mysteries that are yet to be revealed, it's highly likely there are going to be a great many surprises that will reveal God is more merciful and tender than many had presumed.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[Tacenda]

7 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Yeah, about that.
Not sure what Disney version of God you've been reading about, but that doesn't match any description of God found in scripture.
Quite the opposite in fact.

Maybe you haven't read enough NDE's then JL.  

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Maybe you haven't read enough NDE's then JL.  

That's funny.

[bluebell]

10 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Don't be troubled by any exclusionary doctrines.  If there is a god and that god is a loving god, then we will be with our loved ones.  No parent would deny their children happiness. 

Rewarding a child for disobedience is not a definition of "good parent" that I'm familiar with. 

 

[RevTestament]

11 hours ago, Jeanne said:

I am a widow, and ex-mormon.  That puts this theology in a hurtful place for me.  I live life with a longing to be with him again.

You are of course familiar with the fact that you can accept a posthumous sealing done on your behalf...end of "hurt."

[Gray]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

Rewarding a child for disobedience is not a definition of "good parent" that I'm familiar with. 

 

Condemning a child for eternally for disobedience is also not a definition of a "good parent" that I'm familiar with 

[CV75]

14 hours ago, Broker said:

most  ...people won't qualify for the Celestial Kingdom.

CFR.

It seems to me that any the kingdoms have "innumerable" inhabitants: D&C 76: 67, 109; 138: 12.

I think most people don't "qualify" at some point, if ever, in their mortal lives (and at the same time, at some point all qualify, such as at birth).

[mfbukowski]

14 hours ago, Broker said:

This month's Ensign has an article about life after death that ends with this:

"What will people do in the other kingdoms?

Those in other kingdoms will be angels, which “are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory” (D&C 132:16). They will not be married or have spirit offspring (see D&C 131:1–4; 132:16–17)."

I'm not sure the Church currently teaches this as doctrine, so I was a bit surprised to see it in an Ensign article. I know past Church leaders have made such statements, but current Church leaders seem to be (wisely) staying away from teaching doctrines that are not fully understood. (e.g. "As God once was...." or doctrinal reasons for withholding the priesthood). 

The scriptures cited in the article are about marriage in the Celestial Kingdom, but say nothing directly about couples that may not qualify for the Celestial Kingdom, but have been sealed in the temple (perhaps vicariously).

I find it difficult to accept that Church leaders can constantly, and with increasing volume, teach about the importance of marriage (and not just to Church members, but to all people) on one hand, while on the other hand believing that most of those marriages won't last beyond death because people won't qualify for the Celestial Kingdom. No where have I seen current Church leaders warn people that God will tear their marriages apart unless they join the Church. I think they don't teach that, because it's a doctrine we don't completely understand.

Opinions ?

 

 

The words of the sealing ceremony make it clear that all who are worthy and are sealed have he same promise of glory. Those not sealed will be vicariously, so all humanity has the same promise.

On the other side this will be clear to everyone. Everyone will have a fair chance to accept it or reject it.

[smac97]

13 hours ago, Broker said:

If we teach that Terrestrial inhabitants will always have the option of progressing to the Celestial and having their marriages "restored", I can accept that.  

The LDS Church does not teach the concept of progression between kingdoms.  However, I am not sure we can definitively say that such a concept is precluded in the Gospel.  See here for some resources on this issue.

Quote

We don't teach that, but it may still be true and seems to be in accordance with a loving God.

Or it may not be true, and yet the falsity of the concept of progression between kingdoms would still "be in accordance with a loving God."  Our conception of things like "love" and "fairness" is flawed and incomplete and blinkered by our ignorance.  On the other hand, God is perfect in every respect, including love and mercy and justice.  So if there is progression between kingdoms, it is because God is loving and fair and just.  And if there is not progression between kingdoms, it is is still because God is loving and fair and just.

I think we need to reconcile ourselves with and mold our perspectives on such things around the nature and attributes of God, rather than on our flawed and finite personal preferences.

Quote

I've read section 132 over several times. I simply don't see where it teaches that there is no marriage in the Terrestrial Kingdom.

Read D&C 131.  We can start from there if you like.  

Quote

From what I remember of witnessing temple marriages (without disclosing anything sacred ?), the couple are not "sealed" together, but they are married.

That's not quite correct.  See here:

Quote

The Holy Spirit of Promise is the power by which ordinances and other righteous acts performed on this earth, such as baptism and eternal marriage, are ratified, validated, and sealed in heaven as well as on earth. Paul taught the Ephesians that after acting on their faith in Christ they "were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise," which was the surety of their "inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession" (Eph. 1:12-14). The sealing of earthly covenants and performances is conditional and depends upon the recipient's personal commitment and worthiness. If a person who has received the Holy Spirit of Promise subsequently becomes unrighteous, the seal is broken until full repentance and forgiveness occur (DS 1:55; 2:94-99).

I guess this may come down to an issue of semantics.  A couple is "sealed" together for time and eternity, but the efficacy of that sealing is conditioned on the ratification of it by The Holy Spirit of Promise (which, in turn, is conditioned on "the recipient's personal commitment and worthiness").

Quote

What is "sealed" are certain blessings based on their worthiness as a couple. I think it's possible that couples can be married in the temple, a marriage recognized by the Lord, but not necessarily be worthy of the blessings of a "celestial" marriage.

Well, yes.  The administration of the sealing ordinance does not, in an of itself, guarantee exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom.  Consider D&C 132:19 (emphases added):

Quote

And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.

So the requirements for "the blessings of a 'celestial' marriage" appear to include 1) the receipt of the sealing ordinance from those in authority, 2) the sealing of that ordinance by the Holy Spirit of Promise, and 3) the abiding in the covenant by the participants.

Consider the following:

• Elder Richard G. Scott: "Realize that a sealing ordinance is not enduring until after it is sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise. Both individuals must be worthy and want the sealing to be eternal." ("Temple Worship: the Source of Strength in Times of Need," Ensign, May 2009.)
• President James E. Faust: "I wish to say a word about the Holy Spirit of Promise, which is the sealing and ratifying power of the Holy Ghost. To have a covenant or ordinance sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise is a compact through which the inherent blessings will be obtained, provided those seeking the blessing are true and faithful (see D&C 76:50-54).  For example, when the covenant of marriage for time and eternity, the culminating gospel ordinance, is sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise, it can literally open the windows of heaven for great blessings to flow to a married couple who seek for those blessings. Such marriages become rich, whole, and sacred. Though each party to the marriage can maintain his or her separate identity, yet together in their covenants they can be like two vines wound inseparably around each other. Each thinks of his or her companion before thinking of self.  One of the great blessings available through the Holy Spirit of Promise is that all of our covenants, vows, oaths, and performances, which we receive through the ordinances and blessings of the gospel, are not only confirmed but may be sealed by that Holy Spirit of Promise. However, that sealing may be broken by unrighteousness. It is also important to remember that if a person undertakes to receive the sealing blessing by deceit, 'then the blessing is not sealed, notwithstanding the integrity and authority of the person officiating' (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1954-56, 2:98-99).  To have a covenant or ordinance sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise means that the compact is binding on earth and in heaven." ["The Gift of the Holy Ghost--A Sure Compass," Ensign, Apr. 1996, pp. 5-6]
• Elder Melvin J. Ballard: "We may deceive men but we cannot deceive the Holy Ghost, and our blessings will not be eternal until they are also sealed by the holy spirit of promise, the Holy Ghost, one who reads the thoughts and hearts of men and gives his sealing approval to the blessings pronounced upon their heads. Then it is binding, and of full force." (Sermons and Missionary Service of Melvin J. Ballard, Deseret Book Co., 1949, p. 237.)

Several more references are available here, here, here, and here.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited June 6, 2016 by smac97

[Jeanne]

43 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

You are of course familiar with the fact that you can accept a posthumous sealing done on your behalf...end of "hurt."

I do.  I tried to do this 10 years ago in my reactivation when I was confronted with things I could not accept. 

[bluebell]

42 minutes ago, Gray said:

Condemning a child for eternally for disobedience is also not a definition of a "good parent" that I'm familiar with 

Letting a child experience the consequences of their own choices isn't good parenting?  I think you'll find that that's news to every parenting expert (as well as good parent) on the planet. 

Besides, God doesn't condemn anyone-we condemn ourselves.  We don't get to choose to stand in the rain and then say that God isn't a loving parent for letting us get wet.

[smac97]

12 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Don't be troubled by any exclusionary doctrines.  If there is a god and that god is a loving god, then we will be with our loved ones.  No parent would deny their children happiness. 

I am reminded of 2 Nephi 28:

Quote

8 And there shall also be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God.

9 Yea, and there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false and vain and foolish doctrines, and shall be puffed up in their hearts, and shall seek deep to hide their counsels from the Lord; and their works shall be in the dark.

I am not persuaded that God has presented His marvelous Plan of Salvation, that He - through His Son - created this world and peopled it, that He sent His Only Begotten Son to suffer beyond our ability to comprehend, and to atone for the sins of mankind, that He arranged for the restoration of the Gospel and the establishment of His Son's Church, that He sent us prophets and apostles, that He provided scriptures and continuing revelation through which we can learn about all of these things, that everything that God has done "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man" can somehow be glibly ignored in favor of some sort of facile, touchy-feely, easy believism which flies in the face of the Restored Gospel, and against which we are specifically warned in 2 Nephi 28 and elsewhere.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

Condemning a child for eternally for disobedience is also not a definition of a "good parent" that I'm familiar with

God doesn't condemn a child for disobeying him.  The child is condemned for their refusal to follow and their disobedience to law.

Even in our world, if a child commits a murder, rape, robbery etc the parent doesn't get to prevent their condemnation under the penal system.
God follows laws else he would cease to be God.  He doesn't condemn the child, he allows the child to choose their own condemnation.

[Jeanne]

12 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Don't be troubled by any exclusionary doctrines.  If there is a god and that god is a loving god, then we will be with our loved ones.  No parent would deny their children happiness. 

I agree.  Thank you for this.  When one talks about not believing in the "Mormon God"..this is what they mean.

[Gray]

29 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Letting a child experience the consequences of their own choices isn't good parenting?  I think you'll find that that's news to every parenting expert (as well as good parent) on the planet. 

Besides, God doesn't condemn anyone-we condemn ourselves.  We don't get to choose to stand in the rain and then say that God isn't a loving parent for letting us get wet.

No, it's not good parenting if the consequences are eternal. For the same reason it wouldn't be good parenting to allow a child to die of his injuries as a consequence for failing to exercise proper caution. 

"He chose to ride his bike without a help. He condemned himself." 

It's tricky though working out expectations for God. We know what a good parent is in the 21st century. That's not the same thing as what people though of as a good parent 500 years ago. God's parenting style always seems to get updated to fit the times. But how could it not? A personal God has to be relatable and admirable. 

[smac97]

18 hours ago, Jeanne said:

i don't believe it.  To separate families even in their struggle to progress is cruel.

That's like saying death is cruel.  Or pain is cruel.  Or misfortune in life is cruel.  All of these things afflict God's children.  And yet God is perfect and just and kind and loving.  So we have to figure out a way to reconcile these things.  We have a few options:

• Option 1: We can, as you have done, rise up and accuse God of being "cruel" and of other villainies.  But such blasphemy and rebellion hardly provide any sort of comfort.  We'd just end up with the sickening notion that God is a jerk.  A malevolent, "cruel" monster.  I don't believe that.
• Option 2: We could resort to the precepts found in other belief systems.  However, as I understand it virtually all subparts of the Judeo-Christian world - with the exception of the LDS Church (and some of the schismatic elements that have spun off of it) - believe that marriage ends at death.  That families are separated.  That this is the natural order of things.  "Until death do you part" and all that.  Again, not very comforting.
• Option 3: We can reject all organized religion and simply come up with our own individualized set of beliefs, which set perfectly comports to our flawed and finite perspective, which relieves us of any obligation to change ourselves to comport with external requirements, whether they be man-made or divinely instituted.  But this is not very comforting, either.  It's just too pat, I think.  Too self-congratulatory.  Too convenient.
• Option 4: We can reject religious belief altogether and become atheistic.  We can reject the notion that God lives.  We can resign ourselves to the notion that this life is it, and that after death there is . . . nothing.  Again, not very comforting.
• Option 5: As a final option, we can turn to the doctrines of the LDS Church, which speaks of eternal marriages and eternal families as a glorious and wonderful truth.  However, there are some elements to these teachings that are difficult for some to accept, such as A) the natural course of events is that man-made contracts and agreements and such, including marriages, end at death, B) God has provided a way by which marriage and family relationships can overcome this otherwise natural course of events and preserve those relationships in the eternities, C) such a preservation of such relationships is a blessing available to all who desire it, and D) such a blessing is available through the Plan of Salvation, which includes acceptance of Jesus Christ, obedience to His commandments (including the ones that we personally find difficult), and receipt of saving ordinances.

As you may have guessed, I prefer Option 5.  It's not easy.  It's not convenient.  It takes faith and hard work.  But it works.  And it's the only option which I think can be verified by the Spirit.  

I do not believe God is "cruel."  I believe He is perfectly just and kind and merciful.  The LDS teachings about the Three Kingdoms of Glory, and about the corollary difficulty of being relegated to that horrible place of "Outer Darkness," speaks volumes to me.  Even most of the very worst of us will receive a portion of God's glory that is beyond our present capacity to comprehend.  He loves us that much.  His Son's Atonement has that far of a reach.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited June 6, 2016 by smac97