Exaltation for single women

[telnetd]

Regarding this General Conference talk.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1999/10/what-it-means-to-be-a-daughter-of-god?lang=eng

"The prophets of God have repeatedly assured faithful, unmarried women that they 
can be exalted. Exaltation requires that the candidates receive the ordinances and 
the sealing blessings, which means, of course, that they would be sealed to a 
worthy priesthood bearer in the next life and enjoy all of the blessings of 
marriage".

Is this confirmation that the church still practices a form of polygamy, where single
women can be sealed to a deceased married men (who may have plural wives already)?
For example, if five living single women were to be sealed to former LDS President
Monson, would they then be his plural wives in the resurrection? 

[MustardSeed]

9 minutes ago, telnetd said:

Regarding this General Conference talk.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1999/10/what-it-means-to-be-a-daughter-of-god?lang=eng

"The prophets of God have repeatedly assured faithful, unmarried women that they 
can be exalted. Exaltation requires that the candidates receive the ordinances and 
the sealing blessings, which means, of course, that they would be sealed to a 
worthy priesthood bearer in the next life and enjoy all of the blessings of 
marriage".

Is this confirmation that the church still practices a form of polygamy, where single
women can be sealed to a deceased married men (who may have plural wives already)?
For example, if five living single women were to be sealed to former LDS President
Monson, would they then be his plural wives in the resurrection? 

That’s the doctrine yes. 

[blackstrap]

Though possible, there is no need to immediately jump to polygamy as a solution. Take a guess at how many single men have passed through mortality that could become worthy in time .

[Rain]

2 minutes ago, blackstrap said:

Though possible, there is no need to immediately jump to polygamy as a solution. Take a guess at how many single men have passed through mortality that could become worthy in time .

Especially those who have died in battle.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

Regarding this General Conference talk.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1999/10/what-it-means-to-be-a-daughter-of-god?lang=eng

"The prophets of God have repeatedly assured faithful, unmarried women that they 
can be exalted. Exaltation requires that the candidates receive the ordinances and 
the sealing blessings, which means, of course, that they would be sealed to a 
worthy priesthood bearer in the next life and enjoy all of the blessings of 
marriage".

Is this confirmation that the church still practices a form of polygamy, where single
women can be sealed to a deceased married men (who may have plural wives already)?
For example, if five living single women were to be sealed to former LDS President
Monson, would they then be his plural wives in the resurrection? 

Yes, the church still practices polygamy.   President Nelson, for example, is sealed to two women currently. 

When the spouse of a church authority passes away, they are often re-married and sealed in an eternal polygamist relationship.  Even though there are countless widowed women who need companionship, they never choose the widows to marry.  They seek out and find the  never-marrieds.  Granted, these women deserve and need companionship too, but statistically widows outnumber widowers 3:1.  The widows of the church needlessly suffer and are too often overlooked because of this doctrine of eternal polygamy.  They are sealed to their first partner and it would require them to break that sealing in order to be sealed to another man.   The widowers don't have the same problem.  They can be sealed to how ever many women they want.  This places young widows in an impossible position of breaking the sealing to their first husband who died young in order to be eligible and an attractive candidate for an LDS man who desires to be sealed to the person they are going to live the rest of their lives with.  Young widows are not on the market eternally, but only temporally.   It is a tragic mess.  The practice of polygamy still causes suffering to this day.  Not to mention the issue of children.  If someone does decide to marry a widow without being sealed to her, then the children they have together cannot be sealed to that couple.  The children are sealed to her first husband whom they have never met and is not even their biological father.  

Edited March 27, 2023 by pogi

[Pyreaux]

Depends if there is an even number of exalted men and women, all entitled to a spouse. In that case the polygamist men need to hand some over. All willingly hopefully. Or would we think perfected single men will have a hard time trying to tear a plural spouse away?

[webbles]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

Especially those who have died in battle.

Whenever anyone tells me that the Celestial Kingdom must have polygamy because "women are more righteous than men", I always like to point out that more boys than girls are born (105 boys to every 100 girls) and since every child who dies before the age of 8 automatically enters the Celestial Kingdom and a lot of children die before the age of 8 (especially in the past), I'm pretty sure that there will be more men in the Celestial Kingdom than women.

[manol]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

Especially those who have died in battle.

The math may even tip things towards polyandry rather than polygyny in the Celestial Kingdom... which imo would be hilarious.  Consider this:

- All children who die before the age of accountability are saved in the Celestial Kingdom;

- Infant mortality rates are higher for males than for females; and

- Male births outnumber female births by about 5%.

(I'm not really arguing for either polyandry or polygyny; actually I'm too much of a universalist to embrace a theology which results in anyone being cheated in any way.)

[CV75]

2 hours ago, telnetd said:

Regarding this General Conference talk.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1999/10/what-it-means-to-be-a-daughter-of-god?lang=eng

"The prophets of God have repeatedly assured faithful, unmarried women that they 
can be exalted. Exaltation requires that the candidates receive the ordinances and 
the sealing blessings, which means, of course, that they would be sealed to a 
worthy priesthood bearer in the next life and enjoy all of the blessings of 
marriage".

Is this confirmation that the church still practices a form of polygamy, where single
women can be sealed to a deceased married men (who may have plural wives already)?
For example, if five living single women were to be sealed to former LDS President
Monson, would they then be his plural wives in the resurrection? 

Simply marrying someone who has lost their spouse is not properly referred to as "a form of polygamy," both in and out of the Church. I suppose a semantic or hypothetical case can be made for calling it that, but this isn't our practice in the Church. What you describe doesn't tie to the explanation in the talk, which only refers to "all the blessings of marriage." The third party of any sealing is the Master and He takes precedence in how marriage and family will be organized and practiced in the Church of the Firstborn.

In this life and the Church on the earth, we do not seal multiple women to deceased men, including former Presidents of the Church. It was done in the past for a time while leadership was still figuring this all out, but the understanding and practice of the sealing ordinance was different then (e.g., women could leave a plural marriage to be sealed to a single man).

[CV75]

47 minutes ago, webbles said:

Whenever anyone tells me that the Celestial Kingdom must have polygamy because "women are more righteous than men", I always like to point out that more boys than girls are born (105 boys to every 100 girls) and since every child who dies before the age of 8 automatically enters the Celestial Kingdom and a lot of children die before the age of 8 (especially in the past), I'm pretty sure that there will be more men in the Celestial Kingdom than women.

I'm sure this imbalance can be sorted out in the Millennium  by correcting the math from the beginning of time through calculation or incarnation.

[smac97]

3 hours ago, telnetd said:

Regarding this General Conference talk.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1999/10/what-it-means-to-be-a-daughter-of-god?lang=eng

"The prophets of God have repeatedly assured faithful, unmarried women that they can be exalted. Exaltation requires that the candidates receive the ordinances and the sealing blessings, which means, of course, that they would be sealed to a worthy priesthood bearer in the next life and enjoy all of the blessings of marriage".

Is this confirmation that the church still practices a form of polygamy, where single women can be sealed to a deceased married men (who may have plural wives already)?  

I don't think so.

3 hours ago, telnetd said:

For example, if five living single women were to be sealed to former LDS President Monson, would they then be his plural wives in the resurrection? 

We'll see what happens on the other side.

Meanwhile, the gist of the message is, I think, that A) marriage is required for exaltation, B) all those who earnestly seek exaltation will receive it, C) all this will be sorted out "in the next life."

Thanks,

-Smac

[CV75]

47 minutes ago, manol said:

The math may even tip things towards polyandry rather than polygyny in the Celestial Kingdom... which imo would be hilarious.  Consider this:

- All children who die before the age of accountability are saved in the Celestial Kingdom;

- Infant mortality rates are higher for males than for females; and

- Male births outnumber female births by about 5%.

(I'm not really arguing for either polyandry or polygyny; actually I'm too much of a universalist to embrace a theology which results in anyone being cheated in any way.)

From what I can see, the doctrine and practice of sealing as taught in any given dispensation or Church administration may or may not jibe with contemporary societal norms, and as societies change so will the saints’ application and tolerance of revealed ordinances. I too believe the Lord is just and that when he is the third party to a marriage, he will fit us for life in the Church of the Firstborn, and may well permit us to structure our own unique arrangements.

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, CV75 said:

From what I can see, the doctrine and practice of sealing as taught in any given dispensation or Church administration may or may not jibe with contemporary societal norms, and as societies change so will the saints’ application and tolerance of revealed ordinances. I too believe the Lord is just and that when he is the third party to a marriage, he will fit us for life in the Church of the Firstborn, and may well permit us to structure our own unique arrangements.

That is an interesting back door to polyamorous relationships.

[manol]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

That is an interesting back door to polyamorous relationships.

Early-adopter show-off. 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Rain said:

Especially those who have died in battle.

Every knee shall bow.

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, manol said:

Early-adopter show-off. 

I was a dabbler at best.

[manol]

Just now, The Nehor said:

I was a dabbler at best.

It's the thought that counts.

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, manol said:

It's the thought that counts.

I was good at it. I don’t think I feel jealousy as much as others do. It is difficult though and most of those who try it do almost everything wrong with predictable results.

[mfbukowski]

16 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I don't think so.

We'll see what happens on the other side.

Meanwhile, the gist of the message is, I think, that A) marriage is required for exaltation, B) all those who earnestly seek exaltation will receive it, C) all this will be sorted out "in the next life."

Thanks,

-Smac

Sorry.

That answer though correct is insufficiently detailed for this forum.

This will probably drag on for another 15 pages at least!

 

[CV75]

21 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That is an interesting back door to polyamorous relationships.

I love Acts 17: 25-28. “God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, …he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.” I count societal norms as an aspect of the nations, face of the earth, and the times and bounds of our habitation. If there was a dispensation and practice of the sealing keys within the romantic norm of polyamory, and I’m not saying such wasn’t possible, it hasn’t been translated in the Bible or restored, for example, as was baptism for the dead.

Edited March 27, 2023 by CV75

[manol]

40 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I was good at it. I don’t think I feel jealousy as much as others do. It is difficult though and most of those who try it do almost everything wrong with predictable results.

Yes. 

[speculation] What might relationships look like in a world where neither jealousy nor time exist?  Might look like Heaven.  This might be why the angels "are neither married nor given in marriage"... their circles of inclusion perhaps being far more expansive than what is implied by the word "marriage". [/speculation]

Edited March 27, 2023 by manol

[mfbukowski]

1 minute ago, manol said:

Yes. 

[speculation] What might relationships look like in a world where neither jealousy nor time exist?  Might look like Heaven.  This might be why the angels "are neither married nor given in marriage"... their circles of inclusion being far more expansive than what is implied by the word "marriage". [/speculation]

Even if they are ug-lyyyyy? 

[manol]

3 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Even if they are ug-lyyyyy? 

I'm looking at your portrait in your avatar and... well... I'm sure they can find you a good plastic surgeon.

;^)

[The Nehor]

31 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I love Acts 17: 25-28. “God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, …he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.” I count societal norms as an aspect of the nations, face of the earth, and the times and bounds of our habitation. If there was a dispensation and practice of the sealing keys within the romantic norm of polyamory, and I’m not saying such wasn’t possible, it hasn’t been translated in the Bible or restored, for example, as was baptism for the dead.

I wasn’t actually advocating for it. It was more of a joke. 

[The Nehor]

20 minutes ago, manol said:

Yes. 

[speculation] What might relationships look like in a world where neither jealousy nor time exist?  Might look like Heaven.  This might be why the angels "are neither married nor given in marriage"... our circles of inclusion perhaps being far more expansive than what is implied by the word "marriage". [/speculation]

One of the realities that poly and ENM people who are at least semi-successful harp on is that love is infinite and cannot be depleted while time is not infinite and without time to express love the relationship is dormant and in romantic relationships it usually withers.