Degrees Within the Celestial Kingdom

[Darren10]

9 minutes ago, pogi said:

I always interpreted that to mean that someone could marry into a higher degree.  But who knows?  If you can't find a spouse after a thousand year millennium with a perfect body, then there probably isn't much hope for you!

Maybe the progression between degrees is simply to prepare us for godhood for those who are married. 

"If you can't find a spouse after a thousand year millennium with a perfect body, then there probably isn't much hope for you!" -

[Darren10]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

How do you reconcile that idea to  D&C 131

D&C 131:1-4

 

Unless there's a clear deadline set I do not think this prohibits to marry (sealed) for eternity in the next life and then obtain a greater degree of glory than he or she would otherwise.

Edited March 30, 2017 by Darren10

[Darren10]

49 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I thought those two areas were reserved for those who were pretty faithful but never got married.  They become eternal servants to those who make it higher.  I'd probably rather end up in Terrestrial or Telestial. 

I think I'm gonna meet you there.

[Ahab]

1 minute ago, Darren10 said:

Unless there's a clear deadline set I do not think this prohibits to marry (sealed) for eternity in the next life and then obtain a greater degree of glory than he or she would otherwise.

I think our resurrection date is our deadline, but not everybody is in agreement on that.  And the righteous will be resurrected before anyone else, so the sooner the better.

[Calm]

10 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I'll also note, that no one in the temple is married for deceased people but rather seal already married couples.

If you mean unmarried deceased people being sealed together, I have heard of special cases (1st Presidency approval needed) where this has been done when it was obviously the intent (one case I remember was a couple killed in a car accident on the way to their marriage).  This is not firsthand though...probably at best thirdhand and for most, probably much more removed from original source.

If true, it would seem to be just fine to do such sealings, it is simply waiting on knowing who they want to be sealed to.

Edited March 30, 2017 by Calm

[Ahab]

4 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

I think I'm gonna meet you there.

I'll come by and visit for a while. I think the best barbecue is going to be in the Terrestrial kingdom.

[rongo]

9 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

So do we ignore this in favor of speculation?

Mark 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

I've never understood this proof-texting against LDS doctrine.

1) Whom was Jesus talking to? (The Sadduccees, who denied the resurrection).

2) Why did they bring up this hypothetical? (Argumento absurdium. If a woman married seven men, which one of them will be with her in the resurrection. They thought this was a good way to point out the absurdity of believing in a resurrection).

3) What did he actually say (Note: it isn't what critics of LDS doctrine say. He did not say, "There is no such thing as marriage in the hereafter.")

4) Why did he say, "Ye do err, not understanding the scriptures or the power of God?" (From the outset he ties their lack of understanding to not understanding the scriptures. And, not understanding "the power of God" being tied to Jesus' answer is very fraught with meaning, isn't it? The LDS answer has everything to do with the "power of God." For those who don't understand or believe in the "power of God," there won't be marriage in the hereafter.

5) Who is the "they" Jesus referred to (when "they" rise from the dead, "they" neither marry, nor are given in marriage . . .)?  (It seems clear that he is referring to those who don't understand the scriptures or the power of God. "They" won't marry or be given in marriage. People like the Sadduccees). 

[hope_for_things]

7 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

I remember a back and forth on this topic growing up. Some saying there is progression in degrees of glory, others no. Based on the doctrines we have there seems to be a point where once given a degree of glory in the celestial Kingdom, there is no more progression of degrees. From my understanding, this will all be based on individual choice. 

There are some Journal of Discourses quotes that support the idea of progression from one kingdom to another.  I think either JFS or BRM started to preach that this is an incorrect doctrine, actually can't remember when it started to be out of favor with the mainstream church, it may have been earlier in the 20th century.  

Funny how our church works as far as doctrinal evolution.  Sometimes I think we're super rigid and can't change for the life of things, but all it really takes for a doctrine to change is a little time and a future leader proclaiming the old doctrine as heretical, and wallah we have a new precedent!  

[Darren10]

28 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

So do we ignore this in favor of speculation?

Mark 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

That's post resurrection, no? It'll probably be based on the same result as Cal posted on not having children after the resurrection where those who never married will not have children.

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/68828-degrees-within-the-celestial-kingdom/#comment-1209708244

Marriage and having children do go hand in hand in the LDS Church belief system.

[Darren10]

8 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I'll come by and visit for a while. I think the best barbecue is going to be in the Terrestrial kingdom.

It will be if we get enough Texans there.

[JLHPROF]

We have to recognize that these "kingdoms" are specifically divided according to obedience to law.

• D&C 88:21 And they who are not sanctified through the law which I have given unto you, even the law of Christ, must inherit another kingdom, even that of a terrestrial kingdom, or that of a telestial kingdom.
  22 For he who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory.
  23 And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory.
  24 And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory; therefore he is not meet for a kingdom of glory. Therefore he must abide a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory.
  25 And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law—

D&C 131 confirms this to be part of the separation within the Celestial Kingdom levels as well.

So we know the requirements for entrance into the Celestial Kingdom.  If we stop there then it is safe to assume that we will inherit the bottom degree.
We know that we have to obey all God's laws (including the Celestial Order of marriage) to obtain the highest kingdom.
We have no idea what law dictates placement in the middle Celestial kingdom but given that the laws necessary to enter the highest degree have been revealed it would be safe to assume the requirements are laws and ordinances already known to us.
CK1 - 1st Principles and acceptance of Christ, possibly related to 132:16-17 (ministering angels with no eternal increase)
CK3 - All the ordinances and specifically Celestial marriage (eternally increasing, Gods)

This division is based on acceptance of and obedience to law.  And since the necessary laws have been revealed and we know what is needed for the lowest level and we know what is needed for the highest level we just don't know what the dividing line is for the middle level.
Some Church members have speculated (1. Baptized, 2. Endowed, 3. Married/Sealed).  I have read that some fundamentalists have speculated (1. Single, 2. Monogamist, 3. Polygamist).
There are probably other possibilities but the laws relating to this have been revealed even if the dividing line has not.
 

27 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

So do we ignore this in favor of speculation?

Mark 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

This refers specifically to "post-resurrection".  All ordinances must be performed in mortality before resurrection is given.   That is why we do work for the dead.
After judgment is passed and resurrection complete we won't have that opportunity.


 

[Calm]

Collections of thoughts on the matter (probably lots of duplication, too zoning out to edit into one list)

http://en.fairmormon.org/Plan_of_salvation/Three_degrees_of_glory/Progression_between_kingdoms

http://mormonmessenger.com/progression-between-kingdoms-lds/

http://scottwoodward.org/kingdomsofglory_progressionbetweenkingdoms.html

http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/some-pro-progression-between-kingdoms-quotes/

[JAHS]

Who goes into the two lower levels was explained by Elder Alvin R Dyre:
"Since the celestial kingdom will have three heavens or degrees,  no doubt all who will inherit the second degree, in addition to possessing all of the qualities of those who will possess the first, or lowest degree, will receive an endowment in the temples of God for this purpose, and will have "overcome by faith," and be sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise, which the Father sheds forth upon all those who are just and true. They attained this by obedience to the sacred obligations of the endowment which they received by covenant." (Who Am I, Alvin R. Dyre)

The main difference being that they have not been sealed to a spouse in the temple. 
I am wondering if those who have been sealed but their sealing has not been sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise will not go into the highest level? 
How does one know if it has been sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise?

[Jeanne]

Just a question.  Why don't LDS really know?  Why would God not explain these things..?

[HappyJackWagon]

8 minutes ago, rongo said:

I've never understood this proof-texting against LDS doctrine.

1) Whom was Jesus talking to? (The Sadduccees, who denied the resurrection).

2) Why did they bring up this hypothetical? (Argumento absurdium. If a woman married seven men, which one of them will be with her in the resurrection. They thought this was a good way to point out the absurdity of believing in a resurrection).

3) What did he actually say (Note: it isn't what critics of LDS doctrine say. He did not say, "There is no such thing as marriage in the hereafter.")

4) Why did he say, "Ye do err, not understanding the scriptures or the power of God?" (From the outset he ties their lack of understanding to not understanding the scriptures. And, not understanding "the power of God" being tied to Jesus' answer is very fraught with meaning, isn't it? The LDS answer has everything to do with the "power of God." For those who don't understand or believe in the "power of God," there won't be marriage in the hereafter.

5) Who is the "they" Jesus referred to (when "they" rise from the dead, "they" neither marry, nor are given in marriage . . .)?  (It seems clear that he is referring to those who don't understand the scriptures or the power of God. "They" won't marry or be given in marriage. People like the Sadduccees). 

Good answer, although I don't think I'm proof texting any more than every other person who quotes a scripture.

When I read "married or given in marriage" I interpret it as a verb, meaning that people will not be married (or get married) in the next life, not that already married people won't remain married. Does that make sense?

If during the millennium people will be marrying each other and getting sealed etc, why the need for vicarious work for the dead. Why not allow them to do it for themselves during the millennium?

If we "know so little" about how things will work in the next life, why do we do temple work as if we understand how it works and what these people want, when they could simply accept and receive the necessary ordinances in the next life or millennium?

[Darren10]

13 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

There are some Journal of Discourses quotes that support the idea of progression from one kingdom to another.  I think either JFS or BRM started to preach that this is an incorrect doctrine, actually can't remember when it started to be out of favor with the mainstream church, it may have been earlier in the 20th century.  

Funny how our church works as far as doctrinal evolution.  Sometimes I think we're super rigid and can't change for the life of things, but all it really takes for a doctrine to change is a little time and a future leader proclaiming the old doctrine as heretical, and wallah we have a new precedent!  

Yeah, as I see it, the LDS Church is very liberal when it comes to allowing members to interpret doctrines, including its leaders. There a strict understanding of the Standard Works and b) wait for direct revelation to the leaders of the Church to clear things up though n the large scope of things, considering how many doctirnes there are to interpret, this almost never happens so, in my view, "a" is the best route to take the vast majority of the time.  

Edited March 30, 2017 by Darren10

[hope_for_things]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

Collections of thoughts on the matter (probably lots of duplication, too zoning out to edit into one list)

http://en.fairmormon.org/Plan_of_salvation/Three_degrees_of_glory/Progression_between_kingdoms

http://mormonmessenger.com/progression-between-kingdoms-lds/

http://scottwoodward.org/kingdomsofglory_progressionbetweenkingdoms.html

http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/some-pro-progression-between-kingdoms-quotes/

Thanks for these links I'll take a look.  I noticed on the Scott Woodward link at the top "No official church doctrine on this question".  I always love it when people use that phrase, since technically there are no official church doctrines on virtually anything, since the church has never created a creedal list of doctrines, even though the articles of faith sort of function this way.  Nothing is "official".  :-)

[JLHPROF]

7 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

There are some Journal of Discourses quotes that support the idea of progression from one kingdom to another.  I think either JFS or BRM started to preach that this is an incorrect doctrine, actually can't remember when it started to be out of favor with the mainstream church, it may have been earlier in the 20th century.

Funny how our church works as far as doctrinal evolution.  Sometimes I think we're super rigid and can't change for the life of things, but all it really takes for a doctrine to change is a little time and a future leader proclaiming the old doctrine as heretical, and wallah we have a new precedent!

Our Church teachings may have evolved but the reality of existence didn't.
Either Brigham is right that you can progress between kingdoms (or kingdoms can progress) or JFS/BRM are right that you stay at the level assigned forever.

Whether one teaching is a heresy and one is Church teaching makes no difference to whether this progression is possible.
Unless God has spoken on the issue they are both speculation.  IMO Brigham was right on this.  The other idea makes no sense to me whatsoever.
 

[The Nehor]

One is single men and one is single women?

One was baptized and kept the covenant and the other received their endowment and kept it?

Some distinction that would make no sense if it were explained to us?

Who knows?

[Ahab]

7 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

It will be if we get enough Texans there.

Yeah, I'm from Texas and I know how to use herbs and a smoker.

I'm just thinking the meat will need to come from the Terrestrial kingdom because there won't be much killing of animals in the Celestial kingdom.

[Ahab]

7 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Just a question.  Why don't LDS really know?  Why would God not explain these things..?

He has. Some people just don't believe it.

[JLHPROF]

7 minutes ago, Calm said:

Collections of thoughts on the matter (probably lots of duplication, too zoning out to edit into one list)

http://en.fairmormon.org/Plan_of_salvation/Three_degrees_of_glory/Progression_between_kingdoms

http://mormonmessenger.com/progression-between-kingdoms-lds/

http://scottwoodward.org/kingdomsofglory_progressionbetweenkingdoms.html

http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/some-pro-progression-between-kingdoms-quotes/

Awesome.
Also:
http://forgottenmormonteachings.com/

 

[JAHS]

5 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Just a question.  Why don't LDS really know?  Why would God not explain these things..?

For he will give unto the faithful line upon line, precept upon precept; and I will try you and prove you herewith. (D&C 98: 12)

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. (John 16: 12)

I guess it's on a need to know basis. When we need to know and are ready to know He will tell us.

[Darren10]

6 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Yeah, I'm from Texas and I know how to use herbs and a smoker.

I'm just thinking the meat will need to come from the Terrestrial kingdom because there won't be much killing of animals in the Celestial kingdom.

Well, all dogs goto heaven. If that's interpreted as Celestial Kingdom then no BBQ dog meat for the obedient.

[HappyJackWagon]

5 minutes ago, Ahab said:

He has. Some people just don't believe it.

Really?

Can you provide a source where God explained the degrees of the Celestial Kingdom?