LDS - Celestial Marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter JJ59
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JJ59

Guest
I was wondering how the LDS teaching of Celestial Marriage fits in with what Jesus said in Matthew 22:30,

“At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.”

I’m not looking for a debate at all, I’m just curious as to how the LDS interpret this passage, which to me at least seems to contradict the teaching of Celestial Marriage.

Thanks 🙂

God bless,
 
JJ59 said:
I was wondering how the LDS teaching of Celestial Marriage fits in with what Jesus said in Matthew 22:30,

“At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.”

I’m not looking for a debate at all, I’m just curious as to how the LDS interpret this passage, which to me at least seems to contradict the teaching of Celestial Marriage.

Thanks 🙂

God bless,
Click to expand...
We think that Matthew 22:30 refers to those who do not enter into eternal marriage covenant. When they die they are no longer married. They do not advance beyond becoming angels (i.e. ministering servants) to the Lord, and to those who receive exaltation. It applies to the majority of mankind. Those who receive exaltation (i.e. become married for eternity) are a minority.
 
Oh so are not all LDS marriages “eternal” in the sense that they’re Celestial Marriages?

God bless,
 
JJ59 said:
I was wondering how the LDS teaching of Celestial Marriage fits in with what Jesus said in Matthew 22:30,

“At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.”

I’m not looking for a debate at all, I’m just curious as to how the LDS interpret this passage, which to me at least seems to contradict the teaching of Celestial Marriage.

Thanks 🙂

God bless,
Click to expand...
JJ59,
Hi, and God bless you also. I hope you won’t mind my chiming in as well.

It would seem pretty important to look at the context of passages of scripture where the Savior is speaking to specific groups–especially when a question has been “set up” to try and trap Him, as was the case with the question by the Sadducees, “which say that there is no resurrection.” They wanted to give Him a complicated case to see how He would prove that there is indeed a resurrection but yet answer their question.

Remember, the Sadducees would be part of a group of Jews who were hung up with the law and were not looking for a Redeemer and Savior, nor believed in the resurrection. So these men, by asking about “there were with us seven brethren”, were already providing a specific context for their question, and it did not have to do with every marriage in the world. It had to do with a particular marriage of a particular Sadducee, who by being a Sadducee means he does not believe in the resurrection and therefore has rejected the coming of a Savior to the world. He would be disqualified from having an eternal marriage, right off the bat, because of unbelief.

Note how the multitude “were astonished at his doctrine” (v. 33), and I’m sure were astonished at how deftly He answered the question. “They” (meaning the Sadducees brothers) “neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” So the answer means that the Sadducees will be resurrected, but will not have eternal marriages because (1) they have already rejected the Savior in life, and (2) there is not going to be a second chance for eternal marriage in the resurrection for those who have rejected the Savior’s grace in life while knowing about Him. All they can attain is the stature of angels (which is fine and glorious, but not all they could have attained if they had embraced the saving gospel of Jesus Christ and rejected the traditions of their fathers.)

The question actually shows that the Sadducees were aware that there was a doctrine of eternal marriage, which would be why they asked the question in the first place–“whose wife shall she be of the seven?”

The Savior gave, of course, a brilliant response, and put them “to silence.”

I hope that has given you something to think about. Read the whole passage a few times, and remember the Savior’s specific audience for the answer to the question He was asked. He wasn’t talking to future Catholics, nor to future LDS. He was talking to Sadducees only in that particular instance.
 
ParkerD said:
The question actually shows that the Sadducees were aware that there was a doctrine of eternal marriage, which would be why they asked the question in the first place–“whose wife shall she be of the seven?”
Click to expand...
No, Parker. It shows that the Sadducees, like everyone else back then, was aware of the Book of Tobit, from whence comes the tale of the woman widowed seven times (Tobit 3:7-8). It was a very popular book at the time of Jesus. Since that book was removed from the bible you read, you are ignorant of it and you therefore misinterpret the New Testament passage that alludes to it.
 
PaulDupre said:
No, Parker. It shows that the Sadducees, like everyone else back then, was aware of the Book of Tobit, from whence comes the tale of the woman widowed seven times (Tobit 3:7-8). It was a very popular book at the time of Jesus. Since that book was removed from the bible you read, you are ignorant of it and you therefore misinterpret the New Testament passage that alludes to it.
Click to expand...
Hi, Paul,
The Book of Tobit says nothing about whether marriage endures past the grave, but it does note that the faithful in that book desired to be buried next to their spouse.

I think the Jews at the time that book describes had a great reverence toward marriage. I think even Catholics can learn several important lessons from such a book as that. 👍 (I’ve read it.)
 
ParkerD said:
Hi, Paul,
The Book of Tobit says nothing about whether marriage endures past the grave, but it does note that the faithful in that book desired to be buried next to their spouse.

I think the Jews at the time that book describes had a great reverence toward marriage. I think even Catholics can learn several important lessons from such a book as that. 👍 (I’ve read it.)
Click to expand...
Oh Parker, you are the artful dodger! :rolleyes:

Do Mormons really think we “gentiles” are so stupid, that we can’t tell when you are being deliberately obtuse?
 
ParkerD said:
Hi, Paul,
The Book of Tobit says nothing about whether marriage endures past the grave, but it does note that the faithful in that book desired to be buried next to their spouse.

I think the Jews at the time that book describes had a great reverence toward marriage. I think even Catholics can learn several important lessons from such a book as that. 👍 (I’ve read it.)
Click to expand...
You do understand why this is funny don’t you?
 
ParkerD said:
Hi, Paul,
The Book of Tobit says nothing about whether marriage endures past the grave, but it does note that the faithful in that book desired to be buried next to their spouse.

I think the Jews at the time that book describes had a great reverence toward marriage. I think even Catholics can learn several important lessons from such a book as that. 👍 (I’ve read it.)
Click to expand...
Because Catholics don’t have a great reverence toward marriage? :rolleyes:
 
TheosisM said:
Because Catholics don’t have a great reverence toward marriage? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
No, you see, only Mormons truly love their families. We Christians are mere “brute beasts”, to quote John Taylor and Brigham Young. If we really cared for our families, we would be LDS. Any TBM will tell you that. :rolleyes:
 
TheosisM said:
Because Catholics don’t have a great reverence toward marriage? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
TheosisM,
Whoever came up with the belief that no marriage endures after death, did not have a great reverence toward marriage–that is correct. The rest who followed that originator, were just being followers so they might have reverence toward marriage but just be mislead by the originator. (Christ was not the originator of that belief.)

But there are also other good points to learn from the Book of Tobias. A belief and acceptance of angelic messengers, for one.
 
ParkerD said:
But there are also other good points to learn from the Book of Tobias. A belief and acceptance of angelic messengers, for one.
Click to expand...
Interesting that, in the bible, angelic messengers never appeared to a crooked, lying fraud and bully who couldn’t keep it in his pants.
 
ParkerD said:
TheosisM,
Whoever came up with the belief that no marriage endures after death, did not have a great reverence toward marriage–that is correct. The rest who followed that originator, were just being followers so they might have reverence toward marriage but just be mislead by the originator. (Christ was not the originator of that belief.)

But there are also other good points to learn from the Book of Tobias. A belief and acceptance of angelic messengers, for one.
Click to expand...
You know it’s funny but I don’t know of any Christians that believe they will be separated from family after death. Only Mormons seem to think some thing has to be done in order for families to be together, for everyone else it’s a given. Who is it that has a low opinion of marriage and family???

And just how do couples get to be together if one does not persevere to the end??? Oh yah they’ll be able to choose an appropriate spouse from the worthy who made it to the CK… I don’t see much reverence for marriage in that. What is reverent about tossing the lesser spouse for a better one in the CK?
 
zaffiroborant said:
You know it’s funny but I don’t know of any Christians that believe they will be separated from family after death. Only Mormons seem to think some thing has to be done in order for families to be together, for everyone else it’s a given. Who is it that has a low opinion of marriage and family???

And just how do couples get to be together if one does not persevere to the end??? Oh yah they’ll be able to choose an appropriate spouse from the worthy who made it to the CK… I don’t see much reverence for marriage in that. What is reverent about tossing the lesser spouse for a better one in the CK?
Click to expand...
Zaffiroborant,
So you’re saying that Catholics believe that marriage endures after death?

If I have understood correctly, the answer will be “no.” If you would like to describe the relationship a man and the person he was married to in life will have after their death and resurrection, then I would be interested in trying to understand that, and trying to understand how that relationship would differ from the relationship with any other person of either gender, if at all, in the resurrection.
 
zaffiroborant said:
And just how do couples get to be together if one does not persevere to the end??? Oh yah they’ll be able to choose an appropriate spouse from the worthy who made it to the CK… I don’t see much reverence for marriage in that. What is reverent about tossing the lesser spouse for a better one in the CK?
Click to expand...
Actually the Mormon leaders will assign people to new spouses the way they do in the temple now, and the way the early LDS prophets taught that wives could be “taken” from an unrighteous elder and “given” to another (the wives had no say in the matter - one righteous elder is as good as another). Mormon elders don’t really need to choose their own spouses. After all, they’re just enlarging their collections. It’s like LDS Apostle Heber C. Kimball said (in the Mormon Tabernacle, in front of a congregation of several thousand):
“I think no more of taking another wife than I do of buying another cow.”
Click to expand...
Except that he would have to pay for the cow. Not so for the wife.

But you see, the Mormons have much to teach us poor Catholics about reverence for marriage. :rotfl:
 
ParkerD said:
Zaffiroborant,
So you’re saying that Catholics believe that marriage endures after death?
Click to expand...
No, marriage is unnecessary after death. Those who are admitted into the presence of God (what Christians call “the beatific vision”) will all be united in Christ (He being the vine, we being the branches) in such complete intimacy and unashamed honesty that any present earthly relationship (including marriage) will pale in comparison. Of course we will still treasure those who, on earth, helped us to salvation (my wife, children, parents, siblings, teachers, pastors, friends and confidants) but all earthly relationships will give way to the complete and honest intimacy without guile that all in God’s presence will share. That is the way God lives in the Trinity (the real family) - completely open and honest, completely truthful, completely Himself, completely loving, completely in the moment every moment. When we are adopted into His family, we will live that way, too. Why would we need marriage?

Of course, Mormons think we still need marriage because they envision the next life to be like this life, only better and longer, with sex and procreation and bearing children (albeit spirit children) and going to work every day for Kolob, Inc. (a division of AmWay), building your spirit-child downline and clawing your way up the MLM ladder to Diamond Distributor godhood.

No wonder Mormons are so unhappy, with that to look forward to.
 
Does anyone see a similarity between what Mormons and Muslims believe about the next life, or the lives of Brigham Young and Mohamed?
 
That’s funny. I know more LDS who are into porn even though they are married. Catholics? none. They revere their wives too much, and find it appalling.

But, yeah, we hold no reverence when it comes to marriage.

We don’t have secret names that the husband can hold over the woman’s head. We have one partner per spouse.

Sorry. That was a really horrible comment. Joseph Smith was NOT anywhere close to being the husband I’d allow in my marital bed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top