Those not sealed.

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, Rivers said:

Even if all the body parts are restored to their perfect frame?

Apparently that even applies to ministering angels in the Celestial Glory.

[pogi]

1 minute ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Each and every such family is being sealed together in holy temples of God, thus extending that human and mortal contract.  It need only be accepted by the parties on the other side of the veil.  God's plan is clever and all-encompassing.  That's his work and his glory.  To bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.

Absolutely!  That is naturally inferred in my statement as a Latter-day Saint.  However, the person still has to use their agency and accept it - just as the person in the parable who came late to work, still had to make the decision to work, though it was late.

[Glenn101]

43 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

How can you be at peace with that god, though?

Do you have family that has “strayed” from the teachings of the LDS church whom you love?  Good people, but maybe aren’t temple worthy?

By your position, it seems you are at peace that they don’t belong with you after you die. For eternity, they are no longer in your family.  You cannot be with them.

Do you have children?  Grandchildren?  If they aren’t “noble and true”, yet you want to be with them, and they want to be with you, you worship a god who would pull them away from you?

Maybe we need to look at a couple or more scriptures on this matter. First, take Doctrine and Covenants Section 130 Verse 2:

Quote

And that same sociality which exists among us here will exist among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy.

It seems that we will have friends etc. in the next life that we will socialize with in some manner, and from D&C 76 we learn that the terrestrial kingdom will be ministered to by people from the celestial kingdom. It does not make it a far stretch to believe that members of the celestial kingdom will be able to visit former family and friends in the terrestrial kingdom.

But, in section 130 we also are told:

Quote

20 There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—

21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated.

And again in section 88 we are taught:

Quote

32 And they who remain shall also be quickened; nevertheless, they shall return again to their own place, to enjoy that which they are willing to receive, because they were not willing to enjoy that which they might have received.

33 For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift.

As Pogi said, it is not God that will break up families. It will be the individuals themselves that are unwilling to abide by the principles necessary to obtain the gifts, the blessings that God has in store for him or her.

The bottom line is that we need to ascertain the truth. We will not be given all knowledge, but we can ascertain the truth of Jesus the Christ as our Savior and Redeemer, of Joseph Smith as a prophet, and of the restoration of the gospel and the priesthood. Because no matter what we as mortals with our very limited understanding of God and His Kingdom, whatever the truth is, that is what we will have to deal with. Celestial, terrestrial, or telestial. If that is the truth, then we will have to deal with it. And according to the scriptures all of us will inherit a kingdom, a condition that we can abide.

Glenn

[CA Steve]

2 minutes ago, pogi said:

I don't know what they all believe.  

Then maybe you shouldn't try and compare what you believe to what others do.

5 minutes ago, pogi said:

But there is no revelation or promise that says they will be together as a family.  That is just wishful thinking if any do believe that.

Since most Christians believe the canon to be closed, you are holding others to a belief (about what revelation can promise) they do not hold. And since you have already acknowledge not knowing what others believe, I don't think you can categorize what you don't know as "wishful."

 

6 minutes ago, pogi said:

The contract they enter specifies that, they will "part" at death.  It says "until death do you (not the marriage contract) part."  That is the contract, and I believe it as there is no revelation anywhere that specifies otherwise. 

"They" being the married couple, nothing at all about future children.

[SouthernMo]

40 minutes ago, pogi said:

Perhaps it is all a ritual and metaphorically based practice that teaches us to set aside our own understanding and pride and to humble our ear to learn wisdom from the Father of love. 

This is awesome. Thank you.

[pogi]

2 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Since most Christians believe the canon to be closed, you are holding others to a belief (about what revelation can promise) they do not hold. And since you have already acknowledge not knowing what others believe, I don't think you can categorize what you don't know as "wishful."

I was referring to the canon they do believe in.  I can categorize it as "wishful" based on what I know. 

[SouthernMo]

19 minutes ago, pogi said:

No? 

Could there be a more authoritative pronouncement than "I am the way, the truth and the life..."  What can be more authoritative and domineering than the truth?  He actually claimed to be "the truth"!  

King of king, Lord of Lords... of the kingdom of God.

I could go on.

 

I don’t see any instance where Christ calls himself a king of kings, or Lord of Lords.

I interpret Christ’s statement about being the truth and light as one of example, not authority.  I admit, I believe James’ writings to be more credible than Paul’s. But I could be wrong. 

[CA Steve]

4 minutes ago, pogi said:

I was referring to the canon they do believe in.  I can categorize it as "wishful" based on what I know. 

I am not even sure who "they" is in this, but I am assuming you mean all other religions, and that is an awfully big and diverse group of beliefs. Based on the canon you are thinking about, can you point out where it precludes such a belief (that of being together with loved ones for eternity) for this group of "they"? 

 

[Robert F. Smith]

12 minutes ago, pogi said:

Absolutely!  That is naturally inferred in my statement as a Latter-day Saint.  However, the person still has to use their agency and accept it - just as the person in the parable who came late to work, still had to make the decision to work, though it was late.

Yes, and I am always impressed by the dogged insistence by ordinary folk that they plan to cross over Jordan to meet their mother and father:

 

[Storm Rider]

37 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

So the key to understanding Jesus Christ is to understand that he is in charge?  He is authoritative?

In my reading of the scriptures, I don’t see his emphasis on his dominion.

Please help!

Just curious and I want to make sure who I am talking with - are you a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? If not, what church do you belong?

[SouthernMo]

14 minutes ago, Glenn101 said:

Maybe we need to look at a couple or more scriptures on this matter. First, take Doctrine and Covenants Section 130 Verse 2:

It seems that we will have friends etc. in the next life that we will socialize with in some manner, and from D&C 76 we learn that the terrestrial kingdom will be ministered to by people from the celestial kingdom. It does not make it a far stretch to believe that members of the celestial kingdom will be able to visit former family and friends in the terrestrial kingdom.

But, in section 130 we also are told:

And again in section 88 we are taught:

As Pogi said, it is not God that will break up families. It will be the individuals themselves that are unwilling to abide by the principles necessary to obtain the gifts, the blessings that God has in store for him or her.

The bottom line is that we need to ascertain the truth. We will not be given all knowledge, but we can ascertain the truth of Jesus the Christ as our Savior and Redeemer, of Joseph Smith as a prophet, and of the restoration of the gospel and the priesthood. Because no matter what we as mortals with our very limited understanding of God and His Kingdom, whatever the truth is, that is what we will have to deal with. Celestial, terrestrial, or telestial. If that is the truth, then we will have to deal with it. And according to the scriptures all of us will inherit a kingdom, a condition that we can abide.

Glenn

I appreciate the thought and effort that went into your response, but I can’t say I follow your scripture stacking to underline your perspective.

The LDS teaching of the afterlife is making less and less sense to me. Reconciling God’s love with the idea that people will be placed into three ‘buckets’ is odd to me. Aren’t people more nuanced than that?  Can you imagine being the guy who is the most righteous guy in the terrestrial kingdom?  His brother maybe did one more service project than he did, and he’s the least righteous guy in the celestial kingdom.

Becaue of this micro-difference, these brothers are no longer sealed, and their eternal conditions are very different.  I would hope that God would see/acknowledge this. More of a spectrum than an absolute quarantine between three worlds that divides people?

[SouthernMo]

9 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Just curious and I want to make sure who I am talking with - are you a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? If not, what church do you belong?

I’m a baptized Mormon!

Struggling to stay one.  

[Calm]

Quote

And that same sociality which exists among us here will exist among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy.

Otoh, we have some comments that suggest how this all works is indescribable by those who have seen it revealed and if it was just a more pure, loving, perfect form of what we have now, that doesn't seem that hard to describe, imo.

I keep losing and finding a quote from BY that led me to this observation.  I will see if I have gotten better at storing it.

Edited April 8, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

I did get better.  Found it exactly where it should have been:

Quote

"Tell the people to be humble and faithful, and be sure to keep the spirit of the Lord and it will lead them right. Be careful and not turn away the small still voice; it will teach you what to do and where to go; it will yield the fruits of the kingdom. Tell the brethren to keep their hearts open to conviction, so that when the Holy Ghost comes to them, their hearts will be ready to receive it. They can tell the Spirit of the Lord from all other spirits; it will whisper peace and joy to their souls; it will take malice, hatred, strife and all evil from their hearts; and their whole desire will be to do good, bring forth righteousness and build up the kingdom of God. Tell the brethren if they will follow the spirit of the Lord they will go right. Be sure to tell the people to keep the Spirit of the Lord; and if they will, they will find themselves just as they were organized by our Father in Heaven before they came into the world. Our Father in Heaven organized the human family, but they are all disorganized and in great confusion.”

Joseph then showed me the pattern, how they were in the beginning. This I cannot describe, but I saw it, and saw where the Priesthood had been taken from the earth and how it must be joined together, so that there would be a perfect chain from Father Adam to his latest posterity. Joseph again said, “Tell the people to be sure to keep the Spirit of the Lord and follow it, and it will lead them just right.” 

https://books.google.com/books?id=gZztAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA620&lpg=PA620&dq="Joseph+then+showed+me+the+pattern,+how+they+were+in+the+beginning.+This+I+cannot+describe"&source=bl&ots=x3F-0VmF7i&sig=ACfU3U09nMvdLar9fHb4ic7v4BfuWYiQGA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjqo5ruvMHhAhWj64MKHW_DAQoQ6AEwAHoECAMQAQ#v=onepage&q="Joseph then showed me the pattern%2C how they were in the beginning. This I cannot describe"&f=false

Edited April 8, 2019 by Calm

[carbon dioxide]

19 hours ago, Rivers said:

I know that.  But unsealed people can still be in contact and hang out with each other right?

They can text message.  For a lot of the young people today, that will be enough for them.  They can't stand real conversations anyway.

[Jean-Luc Picard]

17 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Doesn't mean they aren't together, just not married. Like Jesus mentions "no marriage in heaven", possibly. Or maybe it means no marriage ceremonies, don't know,  but the majority of the world believe they'll be with loved ones.

I remember one my investigators brought up that we are one of the only religions that teaches that families can be separated. I really didn't have much to say to that.

I view sealings as a way to connect families to the greater human family. I don't know what it will look like. 

This has been a big point of contention for my wife, since she is sealed to her mom (who she HATES) and technically not sealed to dad (resigned) and she loves him. She is not satisfied with the, "it will work out answer."

She now just thinks it is made up so Joseph Smith could "seal himself" to prominent families in Nauvoo. 

 

Edited April 8, 2019 by Jean-Luc Picard

[pogi]

59 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

I am not even sure who "they" is in this, but I am assuming you mean all other religions, and that is an awfully big and diverse group of beliefs. Based on the canon you are thinking about, can you point out where it precludes such a belief (that of being together with loved ones for eternity) for this group of "they"? 

I never claimed that it precludes it, but neither does it guarantee it.  There is no promise of the eternal family unit in any canon that I am aware of other than LDS canon.  If I am wrong, please correct me. Without such a promise, then how could it be anything but extra-canonical wishful thinking?

Edited April 8, 2019 by pogi

[SeekingUnderstanding]

26 minutes ago, pogi said:

I never claimed that it precludes it, but neither does it guarantee it.  There is no promise of the eternal family unit in any canon that I am aware of other than LDS canon.  If I am wrong, please correct me. Without such a promise, then how could it be anything but extra-canonical wishful thinking?

Because the idea that a loving God would keep us from hanging out with those we love makes no sense? Like why would that need to be spelled out?

ETA: God:Welcome home son!

Christian: Hey I thought I’d be able to see my deceased parents. Where are they?

God: What kind of wishful thinking is that!? Haha good one. Nope sorry, here in heaven you only get to hang with people you didn’t know on Earth. 

Christian: Oh I guess that makes sense...

Edited April 8, 2019 by SeekingUnderstanding

[CA Steve]

21 minutes ago, pogi said:

Without such a promise, then how could it be anything but extra-canonical wishful thinking?

By asking them what they think instead of assuming. You're still trying to impute LDS thinking onto non LDS believers by restricting what they can and cannot believe according to  your interpretation of their doctrine which you acknowledge you don't know.

We don't even have a consensus within Mormonism as to what we believe about the hereafter, about what "eternal families" actually means or how it will be practiced. So it seems quite a stretch to claim that others don't believe the same as we do when we don't even know what that belief actually entails for us.

For example, 7,254,968,302,475,522,666,845,358 years from now what will comprise my celestial family and what will we be doing? Will I still have the same wife, ten wives, moved on to other wives? Will I be hanging with all my children, their children, and their children's children and so on? What about my parents, grand parents and so on going back? Are they going to be together with me or any of the billions or so progeny they may have? It is going to get really crowded really fast. Will my wife and I be creating our uncountable upteenth  world and populating it with children we can no longer number? Something we have done so many times before that nothing different ever happens, ever, never ever.

 

So yes we have this great concept about sealing families together forever and maybe others don't, but perhaps part of the reason others don't is that the concept does not really seem to work once you apply it to eternal time and increase.

Edited April 8, 2019 by CA Steve

[pogi]

1 hour ago, SouthernMo said:

I don’t see any instance where Christ calls himself a king of kings, or Lord of Lords.

I interpret Christ’s statement about being the truth and light as one of example, not authority.  I admit, I believe James’ writings to be more credible than Paul’s. But I could be wrong. 

You are right about Christ not directly call himself king of kings, but by accepting the title "Christ" (the anointed one), he acknowledge that it is he, the "Lord of Lords", sung about in the psalms of David, mentioned in Deuteronomy and Daniel, and affirmed in the book of Timothy and Revelations.  He acknowledged that he is the anointed on - anointed with all authority to speak and act in God's name and power -

Quote

"...and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me." (Lk 10:16)

Quote

“All authority has been given to me.” (Matt 28:18)

Quote

"All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him." (Matt 11:27).

Quote

Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. (John 17:2)

 

I am curious about your perspective of the Christ.  Do you view him as a mere mortal like the JW's? Or as a God?

 

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Jean-Luc Picard said:

I remember one my investigators brought up that we are one of the only religions that teaches that families can be separated. I really didn't have much to say to that.

I view sealings as a way to connect families to the greater human family. I don't know what it will look like. 

This has been a big point of contention for my wife, since she is sealed to her mom (who she HATES) and technically not sealed to dad (resigned) and she loves him. She is not satisfied with the, "it will work out answer."

She now just thinks it is made up so Joseph Smith could "seal himself" to prominent families in Nauvoo. 

 

http://craigwmiller.tripod.com/interest.htm

I'm with her somewhat, but I believe JS got his ideas on the degrees of heaven from Swedenborg. 

And he wanted to be with his brother Alvin, that died young, the brother that some preacher said was going to hell because he had not been baptized before he died and IMO, JS instituted baptism for the dead because of it. I think Joseph mainly reacted to what the local Christians put out. Or used those ideas that were better than what the going thing was. 

I hate that the church more separates than puts together families. Or that we tout that we are all about families, and then say it isn't going to be the case for all.

And when one of the speakers in conference mentioned many mansions, that doesn't mean levels in the heavens. In the Bible it means something entirely different. 

John 14:2-3
The Hope of the Father’s House

John 14:1-3 “Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 “In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. 3 “If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.

 

Edited April 8, 2019 by Tacenda

[pogi]

12 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

By asking them what they think instead of assuming. You're still trying to impute LDS thinking onto non LDS believers by restricting what they can and cannot believe according to  your interpretation of their doctrine which you acknowledge you don't know.

We don't even have a consensus within Mormonism as to what we believe about the hereafter, about what "eternal families" actually means or how it will be practiced. So it seems quite a stretch to claim that others don't believe the same as we do when we don't even know what that belief actually entails for us.

For example, 7,254,968,302,475,522,666,845,358 years from now what will comprise my celestial family and what will we be doing? Will I still have the same wife, ten wives, moved on to other wives? Will I be hanging with all my children, their children, and their children's children and so on? What about my parents, grand parents and so on going back? Are they going to be together with me or any of the billions or so progeny they may have? It is going to get really crowded really fast. Will my wife and I be creating our uncountable upteenth  world and populating it with children we can no longer number? Something we have done so many times before that nothing different ever happens, ever, never ever.

 

So yes we have this great concept about sealing families together forever and maybe others don't, but perhaps part of the reason others don't is that the concept does not really seem to work once you apply it to eternal time and increase.

You are twisting my words and extrapolating into areas beyond which what I have spoken.  I have simply stated that it is an extra-canonical belief.  There is no canonical (not modern) justification for the eternal family unit.  Again, if I am wrong, please point out the passage to me. If there is none, than how is it not wishful thinking?

[SouthernMo]

4 minutes ago, pogi said:

You are right about Christ not directly call himself king of kings, but by accepting the title "Christ" (the anointed one), he acknowledge that it is he, the "Lord of Lords"

Is there a record of Jesus’ ministry where we find that he accepts this title?

Good thoughts, otherwise.

I’m not sure about Jesus’ divinity. Maybe? What does that mean?  What is the genetic/scientific/spiritual difference between a man and a god in LDS theology?  From what I understand, very little.  In a sense, we are all divine. We are all gods in waiting. Was Jesus special because he was special, or because he saw himself more clearly than we see ourselves?

I do not believe that Christ is the ‘only begotten.’  If we believe in the recorded King Follett sermon, God the Father must have had kids before Jesus.

[Teancum]

46 minutes ago, Jean-Luc Picard said:

I remember one my investigators brought up that we are one of the only religions that teaches that families can be separated. I really didn't have much to say to that.

I view sealings as a way to connect families to the greater human family. I don't know what it will look like. 

This has been a big point of contention for my wife, since she is sealed to her mom (who she HATES) and technically not sealed to dad (resigned) and she loves him. She is not satisfied with the, "it will work out answer."

She now just thinks it is made up so Joseph Smith could "seal himself" to prominent families in Nauvoo. 

 

Indeed. As a young missionary 40 years ago I was a bit nonplussed when I found other Christian traditions believed that they would be with their loved ones in heaven.  I sputtered..."But what about the priesthood authority to seal families together...?"

[pogi]

38 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Like why would that need to be spelled out?

Because most Christians believe in sola scriptura or Papal proclamations.  Anything else is wishful thinking.

Edited April 8, 2019 by pogi