Mormons: There will be no marriage in Heaven

[BartBurk]

the evidence of original sin is evident in
war, diseases, pain, famine
if there was no orginal sin
then we would still be in the garden of eden
and returned to our original state of glory.
next to god on earth

No Mormon would deny original sin. They all believe in it. They just don’t believe we will be punished because of Adam’s sin, but only for our personal sins.

I think the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 405, lends weight to that belief. “Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence”. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle."

Baptism opens people to the life of grace which was wounded by Adam’s sin. It erases original sin, but not the results of nature. I guess Mormons would say that Christ’s atonement erased original sin rather than attributing it to any act of ours, but would agree that “the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.” The argument really boils down to an argument over just how far Christ’s atonement extends. Mormons would say Christ’s atonement extends to all mankind – the Mormons seem to put more stock in Paul’s statement that “… as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.”

Did Christ’s atonement extend to aborted babies, unbaptized babies and young children, all who are without personal sin? That’s the question at issue here.

 

[kevangreen]

No Mormon would deny original sin. They all believe in it. They just don’t believe we will be punished because of Adam’s sin, but only for our personal sins.

I think the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 405, lends weight to that belief. “Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence”. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle."

Baptism opens people to the life of grace which was wounded by Adam’s sin. It erases original sin, but not the results of nature. I guess Mormons would say that Christ’s atonement erased original sin rather than attributing it to any act of ours, but would agree that “the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.” The argument really boils down to an argument over just how far Christ’s atonement extends. Mormons would say Christ’s atonement extends to all mankind – the Mormons seem to put more stock in Paul’s statement that “… as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.”

Did Christ’s atonement extend to aborted babies, unbaptized babies and young children, all who are without personal sin? That’s the question at issue here.

it is up to god
not mormon cult dead baptisms

 

[BartBurk]

it is up to god
not mormon cult dead baptisms

Mormons don’t do baptisms for the dead for aborted babies, newborn babies and young children.

 

[kevangreen]

Mormons don’t do baptisms for the dead for aborted babies, newborn babies and young children.

the practice its self is necromancy
bad sin

 

[BartBurk]

the practice its self is necromancy
bad sin

I don’t agree with “baptism for the dead” either, but it is really not the object of this discussion.

 

[kevangreen]

I don’t agree with “baptism for the dead” either, but it is really not the object of this discussion.

‘marriage in heaven’ is a idea that people have that make them happier cause they think they will be married in the afterlife
but in reality we serve god after death and marriage is for earth
so having sex wouldn’t be a sun.

 

[ralphinal]

Some early LDS leaders thought so, but that point of view never became the official stance. The LDS Church has been silent about this matter for quite a while. Not enough information to make a definitive judgment.

Ok. Although the information available seems to point to him being single

At this point, only people who were actually married (but not in Mormon temples) have the ceremony done for them by proxy. Others will be sorted out during Jesus’ Millennial reign.

I can understand that based on what I know of Mormon Theology (which is not much)

John might have been an Essene, but that’s speculation. Also, the Essenes had some members who took vows of chastity, and others who didn’t, according to what I’ve read about them.

Correct, but the practice was not unheard of. Many non-Catholic, non-Orthodox say that there were no Jews who took a voew of Chastity. That is untrue.

Go to www.lds.org, click the search tab, and do a search for “proxy sealing”. Lots of info will come up.

Thanks. I will.

 

[kevangreen]

Ok. Although the information available seems to point to him being single

I can understand that based on what I know of Mormon Theology (which is not much)

Correct, but the practice was not unheard of. Many non-Catholic, non-Orthodox say that there were no Jews who took a voew of Chastity. That is untrue.

Thanks. I will./QUOT

marriage is for earth
not for heaven
because marriage makes you happy on earth
happiness it eternal in heaven

 

[ralphinal]

ralphinal;4417737:

Ok. Although the information available seems to point to him being single

I can understand that based on what I know of Mormon Theology (which is not much)

Correct, but the practice was not unheard of. Many non-Catholic, non-Orthodox say that there were no Jews who took a voew of Chastity. That is untrue.

Thanks. I will.[/QUOT

marriage is for earth
not for heaven
because marriage makes you happy on earth
happiness it eternal in heaven

I am not sure that marriage makes you happy on earth…most married people would agree…but I do think that marriage is only on earth.

A question for the Mormons: If I die before my wife (and statistically I will) and she re-marries, who is her husband in heaven? If she dies first and I remarry, I guess that I will be a polygamist in the afterlife. But a woman is not allowed two husbands…

[/quote]

 

[PJM]

I have a question for you. Why is marriage a sacrament in the Catholic Church?

Answer because marriage alway’s has been and shall (God Willing) be the very core of society, as well as the very source of society.

Human sexually is too a gift from God who DEMANDS to be the author of all life and death issues.

From:The Wisdom of Solomon3:"If through delight in the beauty of these things men assumed them to be gods, let them know how much better than these is their Lord, for the author of beauty created them. 4 And if men were amazed at their power and working, let them perceive from them how much more
powerful is he who formed them

Thus, the unitive function of Marrried sexually is pleasureable and good, but it must remain open to at least the possibility of birth.

I was under the impression that the righteous in heaven are saints, not angels. Angels in Catholicism are a different creation, and I’ve never heard from an official source that resurrected people will be androgynous. Adam and Eve were not androgynous before they fell. If gender is a part of pre-original sin humanity, then I see no reason why it wouldn’t exist in the resurrection. From there the question can be asked if resurrected people can have sex, and with whom.

Reply: Are not Angels also Saints? Indeed they are

At the First Judgement (and up until the world’s Final Judgement) we too like the Angel, and the Saints, and like God Himself, will be SPIRITS. Thus no marriage.

At the conclussion of the Final Judgement, we will be reunited with out now perfected, human bodies. And the First Judgement (sometimes called the “personal Judgement” will remain in effect, because we, NOT GOD, determine if we will be in Heaven or Hell.

At the final Judgement we will fulfill the very reason we were born!
“To know, love and serve God so that we may be happy with HIM (GOD) in the next life.” Because God is the cause, the purpose and the end reason of why He Created us, our focus will be on giving God the true Honor and Glory that only God deserves.

We will experience total and complete joy, peace and happiness, as is God’s Will for us. We will not be married.

We we recogonize our loved ones? We’ll have to wait to find out for sure, but God is All Loving and All Kind.

God bless, PJM m.c.

 

[BDawg]

A question for the Mormons: If I die before my wife (and statistically I will) and she re-marries, who is her husband in heaven? If she dies first and I remarry, I guess that I will be a polygamist in the afterlife. But a woman is not allowed two husbands…

Hi Ralph,

Your intuition is correct on all counts.

Also, good point about celibate Essenes. They weren’t exactly “mainstream,” but I think it is certainly a good counter to anti-Catholic arguments on that score.

 

[ralphinal]

Hi Ralph,

Your intuition is correct on all counts.

Also, good point about celibate Essenes. They weren’t exactly “mainstream,” but I think it is certainly a good counter to anti-Catholic arguments on that score.

So who is her husband?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Hi Ralph,

Your intuition is correct on all counts.

Also, good point about celibate Essenes. They weren’t exactly “mainstream,” but I think it is certainly a good counter to anti-Catholic arguments on that score.

I’ll tell you one thing though. Paul was celibate. He says it many times in his letters, and he also said it was better for people to be celibate, because they could concentrate on God more.

Whether he had sex or marriage before his ministry, is not for us to speculate.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I don’t think your scripture does anything to negate the possibility of marriage in heaven.

The Mormons are more concerned about sex and reproduction after death than merely the concept of marriage. I expect that my wife and immediate family members will have a special relationship in heaven as compared to those I didn’t know on earth. We will be more unified in heaven than we are now. I don’t agree with the Mormon concept of having more children with my wife after I get to heaven. That’s connected with becoming Gods, etc., but I do believe that my wife and I will enjoy a special relationship after we die.

As for original sin, I am not convinced the Mormon understanding is that much different than the Catholic understanding. Mormons essentially have the same understanding of original sin that the Eastern Orthodox have. Eastern Orthodox don’t believe that we inherit guilt because of Adam’s transgression either. Mormons believe Christ’s atonement negates the punishment due everyone because of Adam’s transgression, but does not negate the results of Adam’s transgression, death and sin. Because of that Mormons would say we can only be punished for our own sins and not for Adam’s sin. In some ways that actually seems more just than the Augustinian model which the Western Church followed. Mormons would agree that all those who have obtained the age of accountability have sinned just as Catholics believe. It is interesting to me that Mormons and Catholics both believe that we are only culpable for our personal sins after reaching the age of accountability which is approximately the same age in both camps.

I guess the question boils down to an argument over the necessity of infant baptism. The Eastern Orthodox baptize infants even though they have similar views on original sin as the Mormons do. Perhaps we Catholics should emphasize the grace which comes through baptism more than simply the covering of Adam’s transgression. This grace opens the gate to the sacraments of confirmation, the Eucharist and reconciliation all of which together allow us to gain forgiveness for our personal sins. It seems sinful to me to deny that grace to a newborn baby.

I think it totally proves my point. How old do you think you will be when you are in heaven? Will you have the body of an old man if you die old, or will you have a completely different body?

Your sense of self will be gone, you will be a being of light. You won’t be eating, or having sex or anything like you did on earth. You will be in the presence of God and sing HOLY HOLY HOLY to Him all the time.

 

[BDawg]

So who is her husband?

The first she was sealed to in the Temple, unless there was an annulment procedure, which happens from time to time.

 

[BartBurk]

The first she was sealed to in the Temple, unless there was an annulment procedure, which happens from time to time.

I know several men who are still sealed to their first wives (who they divorced civilly) and to their second wives. In the next life they will be married to both of them. Usually, this happens because the first wife doesn’t plan on getting remarried and wants to keep her temple marriage.

 

[ralphinal]

The first she was sealed to in the Temple, unless there was an annulment procedure, which happens from time to time.

Ok.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I know several men who are still sealed to their first wives (who they divorced civilly) and to their second wives. In the next life they will be married to both of them. Usually, this happens because the first wife doesn’t plan on getting remarried and wants to keep her temple marriage.

Are you Mormon?

 

[BartBurk]

Are you Mormon?

I used to be. I converted to the Catholic Church three years ago. My wife and kids are still Mormon. I don’t believe in Mormonism because I believe the Book of Mormon is deeply flawed and non-historical.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I used to be. I converted to the Catholic Church three years ago. My wife and kids are still Mormon. I don’t believe in Mormonism because I believe the Book of Mormon is deeply flawed and non-historical.

How does that work for you, if your wife is Mormon? That must cause some friction. (especially the celestial marriage part and the baptism of the dead.)

Actually, you are probably a great authority of how Mormons and Catholics can get along with their very different set of beliefs!