Is there divorce in the celestial kingdom?

[mbh26]

I might also add, is there divorce in the terrestrial or telestial kingdoms?  Is there polygamy?  What would married life be like?  What would dating be like?  Will there be breakups, heartaches, irreconcilable differences where two good people just don't agree as there are in the temple marriages and remarriages we see in the church today?  

[Fether]

No, no, yes, idk, idk, no, no, no

Edited March 15, 2022 by Fether

[CV75]

1 hour ago, mbh26 said:

I might also add, is there divorce in the terrestrial or telestial kingdoms?  Is there polygamy?  What would married life be like?  What would dating be like?  Will there be breakups, heartaches, irreconcilable differences where two good people just don't agree as there are in the temple marriages and remarriages we see in the church today?  

It depends on what you mean.

[JAHS]

What Fether said. A lot of interesting questions but not really worth worrying about since we don't  really know the answers to some of them. A marriage will only be for those in the highest degree of the Celestial kingdom. Most civil marriages have a built-in divorce clause that happens when they die (till death do you part).

[CA Steve]

I love how we spend our entire lives working toward a reward we don't really understand.

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, mbh26 said:

Is there divorce in the celestial kingdom? NO
I might also add, is there divorce in the terrestrial or telestial kingdoms? NO
Is there polygamy? YES
What would married life be like? NOBODY KNOWS EXACTLY - BUT THERE ARE INDICATORS
What would dating be like? NOT APPLICABLE
Will there be breakups, heartaches, irreconcilable differences where two good people just don't agree as there are in the temple marriages and remarriages we see in the church today?   NO

 

[BlueDreams]

3 hours ago, mbh26 said:

I might also add, is there divorce in the terrestrial or telestial kingdoms?  Is there polygamy?  What would married life be like?  What would dating be like?  Will there be breakups, heartaches, irreconcilable differences where two good people just don't agree as there are in the temple marriages and remarriages we see in the church today?  

No and no

Idk - i know that’s not a norm answer..it might be a thing…but I’m also not sure we have a good grip in general on what eternal relations will be in the next life. I assume a little that it will be something that will make his questionable moot. 

great…a divine oneness. I don’t know what that is long term but I like to believe I’ve had glimpses of it in this life at times

 no dating, I assume 

No

with luv, 

BD 

 

[bluebell]

52 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

I love how we spend our entire lives working toward a reward we don't really understand.

Makes sense though, considering our beliefs on faith.  If a person wants certainty, most (all?) religions are not for them.

[longview]

4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

58 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

I love how we spend our entire lives working toward a reward we don't really understand.

Makes sense though, considering our beliefs on faith.  If a person wants certainty, most (all?) religions are not for them.

Since the Universe is infinite and the number of intelligences is infinite, it makes sense what God's Eternal Purposes - - -

Which are:

• invite intelligences to become spirit children of Heavenly Parents
• train them in the First Estate
• plateauing after a great while and NOT progressing as much as before, they asked God how can they be like Him?
• present to them a whole new environment for radically different experiences and call it the Plan of Happiness
• upon entering the Second Estate, a veil of forgetfulness is placed over the minds of mortal beings so as to NOT overwhelm them with the memory of the Burning and Glorious Presence of God

You know the REST of the story.  This work NEVER ends.  Generations after generations, Eternal Rounds on top of Eternal Rounds.  The top degree of the Celestial Kingdom requires faithful and committed covenantal partners.  The remainder cannot be anything more than forever best friends.

[strappinglad]

Given that a significant portion of mortals died before the age of 8 let alone an age to marry, and they will not be kept from any blessings, one assumes dating will be involved sometime before or after the resurrection. 

[pogi]

2 hours ago, CA Steve said:

I love how we spend our entire lives working toward a reward we don't really understand.

Hopefully, most of us are living more mindful lives with the goal of happiness and well-being in the present via unity with Christ in the now.   Based on those personally experienced rewards of tasting the fruit in the present, we learn to trust in God with our future.  We may not understand all the details of what the future holds, but we do have a basic understanding of the promises and concepts of peace, happiness, love, and unity.  Of all the things that I do understand in this world/life, and of all the things I could spend my life working towards, nothing is more valuable to me than the fruit I have tasted from God.  I am more than willing to spend the rest of my life working towards more of that reward over anything else this life has to offer, even if I don't have a full comprehension of all the details.  To me, the details matter less than the principles promised.  It is all about relationships.  Who wouldn't want better relationships, unity, and love?  That is ultimately what we are working towards.  That is the goal.  That is the reward - not all the other details. 

Edited March 15, 2022 by pogi

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, mbh26 said:

I might also add, is there divorce in the terrestrial or telestial kingdoms?  Is there polygamy?  What would married life be like?  What would dating be like?  Will there be breakups, heartaches, irreconcilable differences where two good people just don't agree as there are in the temple marriages and remarriages we see in the church today?  

There is no marriage outside of the Celestial kingdom, and then only for those who are exalted -- excluding ministering angels in the Celestial kingdom.

One can theorize, I suppose, that celestial marriage is as close as two or more persons able to read each others minds -- maybe something a nice Vulcan mind-meld.

Free agency will always obtain, and it may lead some to exit for some reason -- maybe something like Satan, but not exactly the same.  One does hope that Gods don't make too many mistakes.

Dating in lower kingdoms?  More likely just friendships, good friendships.

[Duncan]

I can't recall what comedian said it but they toured Temple Square and were told about eternal families and they asked, 'so, what happens if you're good?"😆

[strappinglad]

1 hour ago, Duncan said:

so, what happens if you're good?"😆

I believe that was Stephen Fry , he claims he was kicked out of SLC for that. 🥴

[LoudmouthMormon]

I have never understood how a third part of heaven could rebell against God, but the celestial kingdom will be totally without any hint of hard feelings or troubles or issues about anything ever.

[JLHPROF]

3 hours ago, Duncan said:

I can't recall what comedian said it but they toured Temple Square and were told about eternal families and they asked, 'so, what happens if you're good?"😆

The Korean missionary sister there told us you can be bondaged together.  

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

I have never understood how a third part of heaven could rebell against God, but the celestial kingdom will be totally without any hint of hard feelings or troubles or issues about anything ever.

1/3 and 3rd part don't always mean the same thing (although the thesaurus says they can).  It's an assumption that one out of three people fell.
Also, spirits and resurrected beings shouldn't be considered to be the same.  As far as we know the third part that fell were premortal spirits.  Resurrected beings falling from their glorious resurrection might be a different thing.

           Third part                            vs                                   1/3

[Scott Lloyd]

The very idea seems absurd on its face. What glorified and celestialized and perfected being would seek divorce from such a being? 

[JLHPROF]

21 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The very idea seems absurd on its face. What glorified and celestialized and perfected being would seek divorce from such a being? 

Brigham Young agreed with you (in his own sexist way)

• " If that disaffected wife could behold the transcendent beauty of person, the godlike qualities of the resurrected husband she now despises, her love for him would be unbounded and unutterable. Instead of despising him she would feel like worshipping him, he is so holy, so pure, so perfect and so filled with God in his resurrected body. There will be no disaffection of this kind in the resurrection of the just. The faithful elders have then provided themselves worthy of their wives, and are prepared to be crowned gods, to be filled with all the attributes of the gods that dwell in eternity. Could disaffected ones see visions, even of the future glorified state of their husbands, love for them would immediately spring up within you and no circumstance could prevail upon you to forsake them."

I would obviously add that despite Brigham's obvious 1800s patriarchal leaning, the same would be true of a husband towards a resurrected wife.
The key phrase in red - "there will be no disaffection of this kind in the resurrection of the just".

[Scott Lloyd]

17 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Brigham Young agreed with you (in his own sexist way)

• " If that disaffected wife could behold the transcendent beauty of person, the godlike qualities of the resurrected husband she now despises, her love for him would be unbounded and unutterable. Instead of despising him she would feel like worshipping him, he is so holy, so pure, so perfect and so filled with God in his resurrected body. There will be no disaffection of this kind in the resurrection of the just. The faithful elders have then provided themselves worthy of their wives, and are prepared to be crowned gods, to be filled with all the attributes of the gods that dwell in eternity. Could disaffected ones see visions, even of the future glorified state of their husbands, love for them would immediately spring up within you and no circumstance could prevail upon you to forsake them."

I would obviously add that despite Brigham's obvious 1800s patriarchal leaning, the same would be true of a husband towards a resurrected wife.
The key phrase in red - "there will be no disaffection of this kind in the resurrection of the just".

I’ve read a quotation from President Young expressing the same thought, and it has given me great comfort. 
 

I don’t agree that the above quote is sexist, but you might like better the one with which I’m acquainted. I haven’t time to look it up now, but the phrasing is along the lines of this: In the celestial kingdom, you need have no fear that the husband will be dissatisfied with his wife or the wife with her husband, for all who inhabit that kingdom will be “as beautiful as the angels that surround the throne of God.” 
 

Added later: I did find that quote. Here it is:

President Brigham Young

“Those who attain to the blessing of the first or celestial resurrection will be pure and holy, and perfect in body. Every man and woman that reaches to this unspeakable attainment will be as beautiful as the angels that surround the throne of God. If you can by faithfulness in this life, obtain the right to come up in the morning of the resurrection, you need entertain no fears that the wife will be dissatisfied with her husband, or the husband with the wife; for those of the first resurrection will be free from sin and from the consequences and power of sin” (“Future State of Existence,” Contributor, May 1890, 241).

Edited March 15, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[strappinglad]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

1/3 and 3rd part don't always mean the same thing

The problem with the " third part " drawing implies that there is a first part and a second part with a distinct divider between them. Unless you want a bunch of fence sitters ??? which has been refuted . 

If it means that one third of the spirits followed Satan then no other division is needed.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

The Korean missionary sister there told us you can be bondaged together.  

Finally something concrete to look forward to.

What?

Don’t judge me!

[rpn]

I think that there is no divorce after this life.   But I do not doubt that some partners may not spend much if any time or space with their spouse.   We will all have agency.

[filovirus]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

1/3 and 3rd part don't always mean the same thing (although the thesaurus says they can).  It's an assumption that one out of three people fell.
Also, spirits and resurrected beings shouldn't be considered to be the same.  As far as we know the third part that fell were premortal spirits.  Resurrected beings falling from their glorious resurrection might be a different thing.

           Third part                            vs                                   1/3

It is my understanding that "3rd part" just means 'a lot'. It doesn't even necessarily mean there were 3 parts (or groups, or whatever).

[filovirus]

18 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

The problem with the " third part " drawing implies that there is a first part and a second part with a distinct divider between them. Unless you want a bunch of fence sitters ??? which has been refuted . 

If it means that one third of the spirits followed Satan then no other division is needed.

Here's what happens when we take everything as literal:

Orson Pratt. Journal of Discourses, Vol 13, Discourse 10 “Revelations and Manifestations of God and of Wicked Spirits”

We may form some little calculation of the vast numbers thus thrown out of Heaven, when we consider that they were one-third of all the spirits that were born, intended for this creation. Only two-thirds kept their first estate, and they have the great privilege of coming here to this creation and taking bodies of flesh and bones, tabernacles wherein their spirits may dwell, to prepare themselves for a more glorious state of existence hereafter. If, then, only two-thirds of the hosts of Heaven are to come to our earth to tabernacle in the flesh, we may form some idea of the vast number who fell. Already our earth has teemed for six thousand years with numberless millions of human beings whose spirits existed before the foundation of the world. Those who now exist probably number one thousand or twelve hundred millions. Twelve hundred millions of spirits now dwelling in mortal flesh! Think of the immense numbers who must have preceded us and the myriads who are to come! These are the two-thirds who kept their first estate. Their numbers, probably, cannot be less than two hundred thousand millions, leaving, as an approximate estimate, one hundred thousand millions of rebellious spirits or devils who were cast out from Heaven and banished to this creation, having no privilege of fleshly tabernacles.