LDS Temple Marriage Questions

[paul_barlow]

if you live your life in a way that sends you to one of the lesser kingdoms of glory. you have earned the degree that you have recieved. we are usually to hard on ourselves and forget the love the lord has for us either of the two lesser degrees of glory are still kingdoms of GLORY. i am sure that using your example your parents would vist you. but you have what you have earned and thats were you will be staying. a mistake that some members have is that they can reclaim there children from a lesser kingdom to be with them. THIS IS A MISTAKE we are only able to do this in this life.

 

[paul_barlow]

majick275:

That being the case, Catholics will still be able to enjoy the company of their loved ones in heaven as we share the beatific vision. The paltry few years that we were earthly friends,family etc. would seem to be less meaningful though when we are in the presence of God. On the LDS side…it sure seems difficult to reconcile eternal progression with “families are forever”.

i wish for your sake that this was so. but if you remember you marrage service you are not going to be with your partner. i think even you will except that our view on the eternal nature of familes and couples makes sense. so love your wife but remember what your covenants are they are only for this life. you have no promise in the eternaties.

 

[ben_dy]

paul barlow:

if you live your life in a way that sends you to one of the lesser kingdoms of glory. you have earned the degree that you have recieved. we are usually to hard on ourselves and forget the love the lord has for us either of the two lesser degrees of glory are still kingdoms of GLORY. i am sure that using your example your parents would vist you. but you have what you have earned and thats were you will be staying. a mistake that some members have is that they can reclaim there children from a lesser kingdom to be with them. THIS IS A MISTAKE we are only able to do this in this life.

Thanks, Paul, that’s simple to understand. It even makes sense using the ‘highway’ illustration that I found - thinking about it this way: if you lived your life worthy of the celestial kingdom you’d have plenty of ‘gas’ to go back and visit others down the road, but as they were worthy of a lesser kingdom only, they ran out of ‘gas’ and can’t go forward AND there are NO free rides! (That’s where there is free will/free agency).

 

[ben_dy]

amgid:

The short answer to that is that you are talking a great load of confused and speculative nonsense. If your aim was to confuse the issue to catch the unwary, guess what, it don’t work.

amgid

Paul gave a pretty good and simple explanation, though, and I may be confusing things, too, with my use of the word ‘visit’ (but I keep thinking about that highway map of eternal progression which is as simple an analogy as one could make and is a terrific aid to have in mind when trying to understand the concept).

 

[Fiat_Lux]

paul barlow:

i wish for your sake that this was so. but if you remember you marrage service you are not going to be with your partner. i think even you will except that our view on the eternal nature of familes and couples makes sense. so love your wife but remember what your covenants are they are only for this life. you have no promise in the eternaties.

That is just not true, paul.

It’s not that I am not going to be with my partner… it’s that I am not going to be with my partner in a marital relationship. Marriage is an earthly institution.

A traditional Catholic vow is: “I, Fiat, take you, Mr. Fiat, to be my lawfully wedded husband, to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and health, 'til death do us part.”

“'Til death do us part” marks the end of what is said before that. There is no “for worse” in heaven. There is no “poorer” in heaven. There is no “sickness” in heaven. In heaven, there is no jealousy. There is no exclusivity. Everyone and everything is absolutely perfect, unflawed, and truly unified in the glory of God. Assuming we all go to heaven, I will be with my husband, I will be with the boyfriend I had in college whom I truly loved but who came along at the wrong time in my earthly life; I will be with my children; I will be with my parents; I will be with my neighbor.

For those who die in God’s grace, resurrection is the great equalizer. Everyone in heaven is perfect, not only in and to themselves, but also in the eyes of God and all the others in Heaven. We will all relate intimately and perfectly to each other.

 

[jim1130]

ben_dy:

Paul gave a pretty good and simple explanation, though, and I may be confusing things, too, with my use of the word ‘visit’ (but I keep thinking about that highway map of eternal progression which is as simple an analogy as one could make and is a terrific aid to have in mind when trying to understand the concept).

So, there are three levels of Heaven in the LDS world? The bottom level is for really bad people, the middle level is for non-LDS and those LDS members who were not great LDS members during their earthly lives, and the top level is reserved for the creme-de-la-creme of LDS members? So, if someone in the top level wants to visit someone on one of the lower levels, or vice versa, do they need some type of special privilege?

 

[amgid]

ben_dy:

OK - the ‘visiting’ part… it’s the only term I could think of so let me see if I can give an example, now that I understand the above better. Let’s say my Mom and Dad were sealed in the temple for time and eternity - as a child of that marriage I am sealed to my parents. (And I’m thinking you’ve already answered my question but bear with me!) I, their son, don’t lead a life worthy of the celestial kingdom - the BEST I could hope for is the telestial kingdom (yet I’ve not apostatized to the point of being cast into outer darkness). My Mom and Dad and siblings have all led lives worthy of the celestial kingdom - I’m the only dark sheep, so to speak. In losing the chance to go to the celestial kingdom, do I also lose the chance of seeing my family again?

The short answer to that, in practical terms, unfortunately is yes. The question is not one of “seeing” anybody. It is more serious than that. The links are severed. The relationship no longer exists. You do not feel a kinship with them, and they do not to you. The following scriptures may help explain:

D&C 132:

15 Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world.

16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.
Furthermore, there is a gulf between the different degrees of glory so that those who are of the lower kingdoms cannot pass on to the higher states. They inherit different “glories,” and their whole condition will be different. Those who inherit the higher kingdoms may “minister” to those of the lower kingdoms—just as angels may “minister” to us in this life. But that is not in the nature of “renewing family associations”. It is a ministration, not an association (see D&C 76:86-89).

amgid

 

[ben_dy]

amgid:

The short answer to that, in practical terms, unfortunately is yes. The question is not one of “seeing” anybody. It is more serious than that. The links are severed. The relationship no longer exists. You do not feel a kinship with them, and they do not to you. The following scriptures may help explain:

D&C 132:

15 Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world.

16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.
Furthermore, there is a gulf between the different degrees of glory so that those who are of the lower kingdoms cannot pass on to the higher states. They inherit different “glories,” and their whole condition will be different. Those who inherit the higher kingdoms may “minister” to those of the lower kingdoms—just as angels may “minister” to us in this life. But that is not in the nature of “renewing family associations”. It is a ministration, not an association (see D&C 76:86-89).

amgid

amgid,

Thanks so very much - D&C 132 is not as clear to me, as I’m sure you can appreciate, as it is rather “new” to me and I readily confess that I have been more apt to sensationalize (even internally) those verses which are more ‘sensational’ as they tend to grab hold and even, perhaps, make me less willing to try to understand the text as a whole… very much as we Catholics often accuse protestants of doing - ignoring the whole. Had that not been the case I think I would have been able to recognize the “gulf between the different degrees of glory” (an excellent explanation!).

Your explanation also gives me a greater understanding about why LDS family members would be so much more concerned about ‘losing’ a family member to an ‘apostatized’ church - and also closes a question that I had long ago when I read A Gathering of Saints, one of the books (the only one I’ve read though I understand that there are others) about Mark Hofmann and his forgeries: in the book, Hofmann’s father does * want him to cut a deal and spare his life but rather wants him to go to trial and be found guilty so that he may shed his own blood to atone for the sin of murder (which somewhere, in the D&C, is said to be the unpardonable sin against the Holy Spirit). It was never clear to me as to why his father would prefer him dead than alive - but I now understand that Hofmann’s father was looking at 'the bigger picture: at the afterlife rather than at this life. According to his beliefs his relationship with his son would be forever severed rather than just temporarily severed - severed for eternity. The book’s author did not really make that clear - although he went on at some length about the belief/non-belief in ‘blood atonement’ he did not explain the gravity of what the father was feeling nor why he was feeling such gravity. So you’ve cleared up a 17 year mystery for me as well. I’m feeling a bit ‘cheated’ by that author now - although I was more interested in the forgery angle than in the LDS angle, because of the nature of the majority of the documents forged the author had to bring in Mormon histories, personalities, etc., but I think he did a poor job - in this particular aspect - of painting ANY picture of LDS doctrine. It led many, I’m sure, to wonder why the father would be so upset to see his son live rather than die. Had he explained what you have, that portion of the book would have made sense.

At some point I want to start a new thread on LDS ‘heaven’ but I’ll look back and see if that’s been discussed before. Thanks again!*

 

[ben_dy]

jim1130:

So, there are three levels of Heaven in the LDS world? The bottom level is for really bad people, the middle level is for non-LDS and those LDS members who were not great LDS members during their earthly lives, and the top level is reserved for the creme-de-la-creme of LDS members? So, if someone in the top level wants to visit someone on one of the lower levels, or vice versa, do they need some type of special privilege?

No - it’s both a little more complex and also a bit simpler than that! I know that sounds contradictory but I didn’t quite have a good grasp on the subject until reading amgid’s latest post. It would probably be best to let one of our LDS members explain but I can give a quick overview and let this be my ‘test’ for an understanding on this particular aspect of LDS doctrine.

The first thing to do is read D&C 76 - scriptures.lds.org/dc/76 - where you’ll find three kingdoms (or glory’s - the eternal progression ‘chart’ that I have calls them ‘kingdoms’ and I think the terms are interchangeable here) going from the ‘bottom’ to the ‘top’ - the telestial kingdom, the terrestrial kingdom, and the celestial kingdom. D&C 76 tells you who’s going where. Within the celestial kingdom there are “three heavens or degrees”: D&C 131:1-4

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.

And then “the new and everlasting covenant of marriage” is explained in D&C 132:19. ©

I wish I could find the original source for my ‘highway’ chart of eternal progression - it only has a “© 1950 Leonidas Devan Mecham Salt Lake City” source on it and Googling the name yields nothing.

So there’s a short answer - my ‘highway’ does show a “1,000 Years in Hell” ‘detour’ for those bound for the telestial kingdom and I don’t think there will be ice cream served!

Although D&C 76 does a good job of explaining who’s going where, my highway has some ‘abbreviated’ billboards…

Telestial Kingdom - "The dishonest, liars, sorcerers, adulterers, and whoremongers.

Terrestrial Kingdom - (many more signs) “The good & honorable but blinded by the craftiness of men”, “Not valiant in the testimony of Jesus”, and. “Those who died without law”.

Celestial Kingdom - more signs than I’m going to record but, yes, it is the “Straight and Narrow Way” and includes uniquely LDS attributes such as “Tithing”, “Word of Wisdom”, etc.

So the Celestial Kingdom isn’t only for the “creme-de-la-creme of LDS members” but the very highest level - what is shown as the ‘inner circle’ on my map - is reserved for those who are of the priesthood and who have entered into the “new and everlasting covenant of marriage”. And the rest of the question is in amgid’s answer, I think.

If there’s interest in this, I may start a new thread because there’s one “place” of which I’ve heard that isn’t on my road map!

 

[gryskull]

DeeAnn:

No that is not what I am saying. I find polygamy reprehensible when it is not ordained of God…

Something like that. I don’t believe that polygamy is the will of God for our church NOW.

DeeAnn

When was it ever ordained by GOD?