LDS Marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter Horton
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
in_servitude said:
I’ve been reading carefully through this thread. I find it interesting that the quote from Corinthians 11:11 would be brought up again on page 15 when it has been effectively addressed on page 2 (and, in my memory, there has not been an argument that Horton has this wrong).

Also, I find it interesting that there has not been any attempt to address St. Paul’s teaching that it is better to avoid marriage. This has been brought up before on this thread. It would seem that St. Paul was not aware of the need for marriage to attain exaltation, otherwise, he would not be telling people that they should not be married if they can handle it.
Click to expand...
That is because 1 Corinthians 11:11 is one of those verses that the LDS church uses, repeatedly, out of context, throughout its lesson material for classes from children to adults, it’s one you will find that Mormons have highlighted, with a scripture highlighting pen or pencil.

There are several verses like this that Joseph Smith removed from its context and created a new theology around them. Usually to justify his own desires for women and power, such as marrying multiple times, or to prop himself up as the fulfillment of a prophecy that has nothing to do with him.
 
Horton said:
I’m curious about a couple of statements made on another thread so in an effort not to derail the thread I’m starting a new one.

Why is marriage required to get the celestial kingdom?

What happens if an LDS male marries a woman of another faith knowing she will not change to LDS?

What happens to a woman who marries a man of another faith knowing he won’t convert?

The way I see it in the quotes above, these men & women who marry a spouse of another faith seem to be purposely avoiding marriage in the temple.

I know it is believed is the LDS that an unmarried woman will be married as a second or third or more wife of another man but does than mean the same for a woman who is married to non LDS man, the marriage ends at the death of a spouse and the woman is given to another man?
Click to expand...
In defense of LDS, from an LDS member.
  1. Well you can get married after death. And I can’t remember why it’s required off the top of my head.
  2. Nothing happens. Doesn’t change things either way. Only difference is they can’t have a temple sealing. So it’s not forever. But they can get sealed after they die.
  3. Same answer.
  4. They may not be purposely avoiding it. They may have just fallen in love with someone who’s not of the same faith.
  5. We do not beleive in polygamy and do not practice it. Women are not “given” to people…?
 
Anthony_Perlas said:
In defense of LDS, from an LDS member.
  1. Well you can get married after death. And I can’t remember why it’s required off the top of my head.
  2. Nothing happens. Doesn’t change things either way. Only difference is they can’t have a temple sealing. So it’s not forever. But they can get sealed after they die.
  3. Same answer.
  4. They may not be purposely avoiding it. They may have just fallen in love with someone who’s not of the same faith.
  5. We do not beleive in polygamy and do not practice it. Women are not “given” to people…?
Click to expand...
Just a point about 5). LDS do believe in polygamy, they just dont currently practise here on earth so as to follow the laws of the land. A man can still be sealed to more than one wife which means they believe in an eternal polygamy ie a man with multiple wives in heaven. I dont believe women are “given” to a man though.

I think you have hit on a good point though in terms of the work for the dead by proxy. Its an important point to remember when talking about LDS theology as they dont believe your time is up when you die. Someone who cant be sealed in this life due to being married to a non member wont necessarily be purposefully avoiding a temple marriage beacuse their spouse may convert or they will have the opportunity to be sealed in the next life.
 
Horton, can I ask about the Catholic belief of heaven and having different rewards that was mentioned in this thread etc? Or shall I start a new thread?
 
RebeccaJ said:
We were discussing your view of marital love and how a wife will easily and readily run to another man when her so-called love of her life, fails to become the god she hoped for. God has nothing to do with that.

If you are implying this is similar or the same to Catholic teaching, sorry, no. I am a Catholic convert whose husband did not convert. I believe the NT teaching that a person in such a marriage, the unbelieving spouse is sanctified by the believing spouse. My marriage has nothing to do with my eternal place in heaven, with God. I don’t need to run to another man, in order to be with God.

My eternal life is dependent on one Man alone, Jesus Christ. There is no other means, or man, to eternal life.
Click to expand...
Excellent answer!👍
 
jane_doe said:
The telestrail kingdom is happiness beyond imagination for eternity, hanging out with the Holy Spirit. The terrestrial kingdom is happiness beyond beyond imagination for eternity, hanging out with the Holy Spirit & Christ. Yes, loved ones will be there, but as singles, not families. That doesn’t sound nice?
Click to expand...
No it sounds complicated and nonsensical. There is no telestial, terrestrial, or celestial kingdom. There is no separation between being with the Holy Spirit, Jesus, or God the Father. These are just made-up concepts by the conman and false prophet Joseph Smith.

There is only Heaven. One place, one salvation, one unified God. We are never going to be gods, nor should we want to. This is the consistent teaching of the Church from the very begiining. It is also the teaching of Christ and the Apostles.
 
Truth_Faith13 said:
Horton, can I ask about the Catholic belief of heaven and having different rewards that was mentioned in this thread etc? Or shall I start a new thread?
Click to expand...
Maybe start a new thread as that is a very different topic than marriage, at least for Catholics.
 
gazelam said:
It is likely that some LDS belief about heaven was provided as part of the Restoration via Joseph Smith. However, as with many beliefs that are uniquely LDS there is evidence of this belief in the Bible and among the good ol’ ECFs.

1 Corinthians 15:40-42* There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead*.

Whether you call it layers of glory or kingdoms of glory, there are definitely three of them.

John Chrysostom wrote:
And having said this, he ascends again to the heaven, saying, “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon.” For as in the earthly bodies there is a difference, so also in the heavenly; and that difference no ordinary one, but reaching even to the uttermost: there being not only a difference between sun and moon, and stars, but also between stars and stars. For what though they be all in the heaven? yet some have a larger, others a less share of glory. What do we learn from hence? That although they be all in God’s kingdom, all shall not enjoy the same reward; and though all sinners be in hell, all shall not endure the same punishment. (John Chrysostom, Homilies on 1 Corinthians 41:4, in NPNF Series 1, 12:251.)

Origen said:
Our understanding of the passage indeed is, that the Apostle, wishing to describe the great difference among those who rise again in glory, i.e., of the saints, borrowed a comparison from the heavenly bodies, saying, "One is the glory of the sun, another the glory of the moon, another the glory of the stars. (Origen, De Principiis 2:10:2, in ANF 4:294.)

Origin also alluded to LDS belief that the Father presides over the Celestial Kingdom, the Son over the Terrestrial kingdom, etc. He even refers to Outer Darkness!

And some men are connected with the Father, being part of Him, and next to these, those whom our argument now brings into clearer light,** those who have come to the Saviour** and take their stand entirely in Him. And third are those of whom we spoke before, who reckon the sun and the moon and the stars to be gods, and take their stand by them. And in the fourth and last place those who submit to soulless and dead idols. (Origen, Commentary on John 2:3, in ANF 10:324-325.)

Clement of Alexandria spoke of the three heavens and suggested that whoever attains the highest degree becomes like God:
Conformably, therefore, there are various abodes, according to the worth of those who have believed . . . . These chosen abodes, which are three, are indicated by the numbers in the Gospel–the thirty, the sixty, the hundred. And the perfect inheritance belongs to those who attain to “a perfect man,” according to the image of the Lord . . . . To the likeness of God, then, he that is introduced into adoption and the friendship of God, to the just inheritance of the lords and gods is brought; if he be perfected, according to the Gospel, as the Lord Himself taught. (Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 6:14, in ANF 2:506.)

Clement also preached that the three gradations of glory are procured by virtue of three types of actions:
Code: 
[Clement of Alexandria] reckons three kinds of actions, the first of which is . . . right or perfect action, which is characteristic of the perfect man and Gnostic alone, and raises him to the height of glory. The second is the class of . . . medium, or intermediate actions, which are done by less perfect believers, and procure a lower grade of glory. In the third place he reckons sinful actions, which are done by those who fall away from salvation. (*ANF 2:506*.)
Click to expand...
Gee I find it hilarious when Mormons use the ECF’s to support their doctrines. They pick and choose here and there, ignoring the rest, so as to create new meanings that fall in line with LDS beliefs. Terrible scholarship, like the bunk you find on FARMS or FAIR. Nobody ever converts to Mormonism because of the ECF’s. Nobody.
 
Chris-WA said:
Gee I find it hilarious when Mormons use the ECF’s to support their doctrines. They pick and choose here and there, ignoring the rest, so as to create new meanings that fall in line with LDS beliefs. Terrible scholarship, like the bunk you find on FARMS or FAIR. Nobody ever converts to Mormonism because of the ECF’s. Nobody.
Click to expand...
I have met a couple trying to save their marriage, a man looking for a social outlet, and a man trying to stay sober all join the Mormon Church, but I have never met a Mormon who was seeking the true Christian Church started by Christ join the Mormon Church. It isn’t there.
 
gazelam said:
I assume the same understanding of speaking as a Jew holds for John 6.

J.G. Davies explains how the Hebrew mind would have assimilated such statements:

“The Hebrew, unlike the Greek, was not interested in things in themselves but only in things as they are called to be. He was not concerned with an object as such but with what it becomes in relation to its final reference according to the divine purpose. The meaning of an object therefore does not lie in its analytical and empirical reality but in the will that is expressed by it. Hence Jesus could say of a piece of bread: ‘This is my body.’ The bread does not cease to be bread, but it becomes what it is not, namely the instrument and organ of his presence, because through his sovereign word he has given it a new dimension.” (Davies, J.G., The Early Christian Church, (New York: Anchor Books, 1965,) p. 54.)
Click to expand...
The difference being that people were actually offended by what he said in John 6 to the point that they stopped following him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top