Family proclamation founded on irrevocable doctrine: President Oaks

[Saint Bonaventure]

20 hours ago, JAHS said:

Dr. Malachi Martin, a Catholic scholar and a former member of the Vatican's Pontifical Institute, "conceded that there was ultimately no real theological objection to a married Jesus".

Malachi Martin! I haven't thought of him in a long time. I used to listen to him on the Art Bell radio show.

I won't doubt his faith, but he seems to be a casualty of Vatican II in that he went all conspiracy theory and a little rebellious. He probably influenced the revival of exorcists in the U.S.

A real character.

 

[teddyaware]

23 hours ago, california boy said:

I didn't say anything was wrong with it.  I am asking if a person believes that Christ leads the way in setting the pattern, don't they have to be sure He was married?  And is that true?  Do they believe it.  And if they do, what is their evidence to support that belief.

The scriptures clearly and powerfully testify that Christ, as God’s Firstborn in the In spirit and God’s Only Begotten Son in the flesh, has obtained the fulness of  exaltation in the highest degree of the three degrees of glory in the celestial kingdom. This is another way of saying that Christ, as the principle heir of God the Father, has obtained all of the powers, divine attributes, gifts, blessings and enjoyments possessed by God The Father. The scriptures further instruct us that the only way for a man to obtain the fulness of exaltation in the celestial kingdom is to be married to a woman for time and all eternity prior to being resurrected, and there are no exceptions to this irrevocable law. Of necessity, this means that the Christ was sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise to a wife at some time prior to his resurrection.

Please note that it is the Lord Jesus Christ himself who pronounced the following irrevocable decree:

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 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.
20 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. (Doctrine and Covenants 132)

Edited April 9, 2022 by teddyaware

[california boy]

10 hours ago, CV75 said:

CFR that the Church teaches "straight" / "heterosexual" marriages -- it clearly never speaks of marriage in these terms.

Ancient and modern marriage relationships are always between a man and a woman, no matter how they are otherwise performed or structured. But we do know that He is legitimately the Son of God and Mary, meaning their covenant relationship was a marriage. It does not matter whether Jesus was married in this life or not; many people are unmarried in this life. But He showed us that His parents were. And we all know that not everyone is born legitimately or gets baptized in this life, either.

 

I am a bit confused about your CFR.  Are you telling me that you are unaware that the Church only does straight marriages? Read the PoF.  Marriage is between one man/one woman.  That sounds pretty straight to me.

Do you think there is a place in the Celestial Kingdom for my partner and me????

[CV75]

7 hours ago, california boy said:

I am a bit confused about your CFR.  Are you telling me that you are unaware that the Church only does straight marriages? Read the PoF.  Marriage is between one man/one woman.  That sounds pretty straight to me.

Do you think there is a place in the Celestial Kingdom for my partner and me????

My goodness gracious. You said that the concept that "the Celestial Kingdom is ONLY for God's straight children" is problematic and I agreed, but now I realize evidently for different reasons than you. Simply put, gender does not equal sexual orientation. Marriage has gender requirements, not sexual orientation requirements. You seem to fall into the group you criticized, who believes that marriage can be "heterosexual" and "homosexual" (instead of same-sex marriage, which also has a gender, and not a sexual orientation, requirement). That is a major conflation and semantic problem.

For this reason, I still have the CFR that the Church says that marriage is based on sexual orientation (and not gender). You will not be able to find any references. 

I don't know anything about you and your partner, and I am not about to judge, especially so early in your path back to God.

If you are asking whether I think same-sex marriage is part of the order of the Celestial Kingdom, of course it is not. Jesus represents the Father, who begat Him through a covenant relationship or a marriage with Mary, so there is no other way for an eternal/divine/temple marriage for the children of God than to follow Jesus, who always points us to the Father's ways.

 

[california boy]

18 hours ago, CV75 said:

My goodness gracious. You said that the concept that "the Celestial Kingdom is ONLY for God's straight children" is problematic and I agreed, but now I realize evidently for different reasons than you. Simply put, gender does not equal sexual orientation. Marriage has gender requirements, not sexual orientation requirements. You seem to fall into the group you criticized, who believes that marriage can be "heterosexual" and "homosexual" (instead of same-sex marriage, which also has a gender, and not a sexual orientation, requirement). That is a major conflation and semantic problem.

For this reason, I still have the CFR that the Church says that marriage is based on sexual orientation (and not gender). You will not be able to find any references. 

I don't know anything about you and your partner, and I am not about to judge, especially so early in your path back to God.

If you are asking whether I think same-sex marriage is part of the order of the Celestial Kingdom, of course it is not. Jesus represents the Father, who begat Him through a covenant relationship or a marriage with Mary, so there is no other way for an eternal/divine/temple marriage for the children of God than to follow Jesus, who always points us to the Father's ways.

 

This is what I meant.  

[CV75]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

This is what I meant.  

So do you also mean that gender is less essential for a couple's marriage covenant with God than sexual orientation?

[rodheadlee]

On 4/9/2022 at 7:25 AM, california boy said:

I am a bit confused about your CFR.  Are you telling me that you are unaware that the Church only does straight marriages? Read the PoF.  Marriage is between one man/one woman.  That sounds pretty straight to me.

Do you think there is a place in the Celestial Kingdom for my partner and me????

There  could be a place. It won't be a marriage but isn't there 3 levels in the Celestial Kingdom?

[california boy]

59 minutes ago, CV75 said:

So do you also mean that gender is less essential for a couple's marriage covenant with God than sexual orientation?

I acknowledge that there are a relative few number of marriages between a straight person and a gay person that are able to work.  The vast majority of such marriages fail.  But yeah, that type of marriage is possible for some gay people.  It certainly is not a route that the vast majority of LGBT people are able to navigate.

Is that what you are asking?  I have stated this numerous times in the past on these countless LGBT threads.  

 

[california boy]

58 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

There  could be a place. It won't be a marriage but isn't there 3 levels in the Celestial Kingdom?

If there is such a place, it would be nice if the Church would declare such a possibility.  I think it would be a game changer for a lot of people.  Right now, there is no "plan of happiness" that a LGBT person can follow unless they are willing to try a straight/gay marriage, something I tried for over 20 years and still couldn't make it work.  I would rather not be in the Celestial Kingdom than give up my partner who is the love of my life.  I guess we have to follow our own plan of happiness.  It certainly has worked for me.

[CV75]

29 minutes ago, california boy said:

I acknowledge that there are a relative few number of marriages between a straight person and a gay person that are able to work.  The vast majority of such marriages fail.  But yeah, that type of marriage is possible for some gay people.  It certainly is not a route that the vast majority of LGBT people are able to navigate.

Is that what you are asking?  I have stated this numerous times in the past on these countless LGBT threads.  

No, that is not what I am asking at all.

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

If there is such a place, it would be nice if the Church would declare such a possibility.  I think it would be a game changer for a lot of people.  Right now, there is no "plan of happiness" that a LGBT person can follow unless they are willing to try a straight/gay marriage, something I tried for over 20 years and still couldn't make it work.  I would rather not be in the Celestial Kingdom than give up my partner who is the love of my life.  I guess we have to follow our own plan of happiness.  It certainly has worked for me.

Well then, you can finally stop worrying because the whole point of President Oaks’ talk is that everyone, except for the sons of perdition, will inherit a heavenly mansion in one of the three kingdoms of glory. He further went on to testify that life in even the lowest kingdom of heavenly glory will be incomprehensibly more wonderful than anything we mortals could possibly comprehend. I also anticipate that if you and your guy want to remain closest friends forever you’ll be able to do so (why not?), but without the possibility of the two of you procreating and having spirit children, which sacred duty can only be performed by eternally sealed and exalted husbands and wives. So in the Latter-Day Saint scheme of things you’ll be able to get exactly what you want. Your worries are over!

Edited April 10, 2022 by teddyaware

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

There  could be a place. It won't be a marriage but isn't there 3 levels in the Celestial Kingdom?

And they are all contingent on obedience to Celestial laws.  And they all require a willingness to give up anything that is not within that law.

[Peacefully]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

If there is such a place, it would be nice if the Church would declare such a possibility.  I think it would be a game changer for a lot of people.  Right now, there is no "plan of happiness" that a LGBT person can follow unless they are willing to try a straight/gay marriage, something I tried for over 20 years and still couldn't make it work.  I would rather not be in the Celestial Kingdom than give up my partner who is the love of my life.  I guess we have to follow our own plan of happiness.  It certainly has worked for me.

I’m sorry that some people can’t get their head around wanting to be exalted with the love of your life. Such a foreign concept. 

[JLHPROF]

4 minutes ago, Peacefully said:

I’m sorry that some people can’t get their head around wanting to be exalted with the love of your life. Such a foreign concept. 

Nobody has difficulty understanding his desires.  The difficulty is in reconciling them with gospel principles concerning exaltation.

Everyone would love exaltation.  Few are chosen.

[Peacefully]

8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Nobody has difficulty understanding his desires.  The difficulty is in reconciling them with gospel principles concerning exaltation.

Everyone would love exaltation.  Few are chosen.

We may all be surprised at who are among the “chosen” ones. As people are fond of saying on this board, “we see through a glass darkly.”

Edited April 10, 2022 by Peacefully

[JLHPROF]

1 minute ago, Peacefully said:

We may all be surprised at who the “chosen” ones are. As people are fond of saying on this board, “we see through a glass darkly.”

I agree 100%.

But we have gospel principles established that will guide those who follow them to exaltation.

We may well be surprised who follows them.  But they still have to be followed.

[Calm]

22 minutes ago, Peacefully said:

wanting to be exalted with the love of your lif

We don’t really know what being exalted is going to be like, just what qualifies us for it…sort of.

Edited April 10, 2022 by Calm

[Peacefully]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

We don’t really know what being exalted is going to be like, just what qualifies us for it…sort of.

“Sort of” being the operative phrase:)

Edited April 10, 2022 by Peacefully

[Peacefully]

8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I agree 100%.

But we have gospel principles established that will guide those who follow them to exaltation.

We may well be surprised who follows them.  But they still have to be followed.

There may also be things that haven’t been revealed, yet. I am open to that. 

[CV75]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

If there is such a place, it would be nice if the Church would declare such a possibility.  I think it would be a game changer for a lot of people.  Right now, there is no "plan of happiness" that a LGBT person can follow unless they are willing to try a straight/gay marriage, something I tried for over 20 years and still couldn't make it work.  I would rather not be in the Celestial Kingdom than give up my partner who is the love of my life.  I guess we have to follow our own plan of happiness.  It certainly has worked for me.

Church members who otherwise know better can find trouble with sexual orientation when desires and behaviors interfere with faith and with keeping their marriage covenants (when they are made). But the counsel is, “And see that all these things are done in wisdom and order; for it is not requisite that a man should run faster than he has strength.” Another way of saying this is to “wait upon the Lord,” which also addresses the trouble created by mistaking sexual orientation, rather than gender, as “an eternal essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” Gender allows for orientation, but orientation does not define gender. Hence the proper emphasis on gender with regards to marriage.

[The Nehor]

9 hours ago, california boy said:

I acknowledge that there are a relative few number of marriages between a straight person and a gay person that are able to work.  The vast majority of such marriages fail.  But yeah, that type of marriage is possible for some gay people.  It certainly is not a route that the vast majority of LGBT people are able to navigate.

Is that what you are asking?  I have stated this numerous times in the past on these countless LGBT threads.  

 

I have a sneaking suspicion some of those people are homoflexible or some degree of bisexual but don’t tell anyone.

[Sky]

What kind of place is heaven that LGBT people can't be there with us, or have any way of getting there?  But apparently some men will have more than one wife?  I'm sorry, but it's not sounding appealing to me right now.  

It's not fair or loving.  

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Sky said:

What kind of place is heaven that LGBT people can't be there with us, or have any way of getting there?  But apparently some men will have more than one wife?  I'm sorry, but it's not sounding appealing to me right now.  

It's not fair or loving.  

According to your personal ways of seeing things.

[JLHPROF]

5 hours ago, Sky said:

What kind of place is heaven that LGBT people can't be there with us, or have any way of getting there?  But apparently some men will have more than one wife?  I'm sorry, but it's not sounding appealing to me right now.  

It's not fair or loving.  

D&C 88:36 All kingdoms have a law given;
37 And there are many kingdoms; for there is no space in the which there is no kingdom; and there is no kingdom in which there is no space, either a greater or a lesser kingdom.
38 And unto every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions.
39 All beings who abide not in those conditions are not justified.

D&C 131:1 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.

[Peacefully]

7 hours ago, Sky said:

What kind of place is heaven that LGBT people can't be there with us, or have any way of getting there?  But apparently some men will have more than one wife?  I'm sorry, but it's not sounding appealing to me right now.  

It's not fair or loving.  

Our Heavenly Father is fair and loving. I stay in the church because it is where I find Him. He has been so good to me and I trust that He has a plan for our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. In the mean time, I choose to be fair and loving.