Forever families

[Always learning]

 My family is very active in the church. I  I am a returned missionary and I  hold the priesthood and understand its purposes. But I've never been comfortable with any explanation that I have given to a nonmember about "why they will not be a together forever family after this life even though they love each other".    I do understand that it is because they are not sealed by the holy priesthood. But I'm looking for an explanation that is easier to understand by somebody  that does not believe in the priesthood or the Book of Mormon  or Joseph Smith.  My daughters boyfriend, who is not a member, asked for the same question last night. Any suggestions on how To answer this question best?

Edited September 25, 2017 by Always learning
Clarification

[anatess2]

52 minutes ago, Always learning said:

 My family is very active in the church. I  I am a returned missionary and I  hold the priesthood and understand its purposes. But I've never been comfortable with any explanation that I have given to a nonmember about "why they will not be a together forever family after this life even though they love each other".    I do understand that it is because they are not sealed by the holy priesthood. But I'm looking for an explanation that is easier to understand by somebody  that does not believe in the priesthood or the Book of Mormon  or Joseph Smith.  My daughters boyfriend, who is not a member, asked for the same question last night. Any suggestions on how To answer this question best?

It is best to teach in the same example that Jesus taught.  See how he taught people who do not believe in sealing powers in Matthew 22:23-31.  Very simple.  If you have faith in the sealing power of the priesthood, then you'll have eternal families.  If you don't have faith in it, then you won't.  Easy.

 

[Anddenex]

As all principles of the gospel are based on "faith" in what is doctrine, it would be very difficult to convince them otherwise; however, here are some thoughts:

1) Love does not define eternities. Our secular world seems to equate "love" with having everything. As long as you "love" -- everything is OK, and that is what is important. No, obedience is important, and just loving someone isn't "obedience."

2) Eternal laws are similar to temporal laws. There are predicated laws (i.e. Eternal life, sealings, etc...) that must be obeyed to receive its predicated blessing. If we are unwilling to accept the the law, then we cannot expect to receive its blessing. These are "if, then" principles, which are all throughout the scriptures.

3) As a Father you have house rules. If your child does this, then they receive this (similar to #2). If your children obey the rule/law, then they receive the predicated blessing/gift. A child that turns sixteen and is given a curfew. If they honor the curfew, then they continue to drive. If they don't honor the curfew, then they no longer have the car to drive. The "love" the child has for their father/mother doesn't remove consequence for not following the rule.

4) The love alternative lifestyle families have for each other will not remove eternal laws. They will not be together in the eternities, as couples, even if their love is greater then some with strait couples. "Love" is not an excuse, nor does it remove law. If we "love" then we will actually do all we can to make sure that relationship is eternal. Meaning we will put the "love" of God first -- do as he commands -- rather than the "love" of neighbor (or even self). This is similar to the child at home that tells dad and mom what the rules are in their home, probably bringing to life Isaiah's words, "And children become their oppressors," rather than children submitting willfully, and with love, toward the will of the Father.

[Just_A_Guy]

Mormonism’s view of an afterlife, I think, seems intuitive to most rank-and-file Christians now—but it wasn’t always so.  A hundred years ago, I think most mainstream Christians would have suggested (as, I suspect, many doctrinaire Christian clerics and theologians would continue to insist today) that the “afterlife” does not entail being separate, embodied individuals; but rather literally joining our essence with Christ and the rest of the saved, in some mystical-but-certainly-disembodied union that would make relationships as we experience them now—including marriage—simply irrelevant.

In that context, Mormonism saying that “families can be together forever” worked (even though it was an over-simplification); because it presented an entirely different idea on how individuality and materiality and relationships would function in the hereafter.  And in some ways, we’ve become victims of our own success—the “Mormon” view of these issues, I think, has more-or-less prevailed in the common Christian’s view of heaven; to the point that when missionaries use the old “families can be together” standby it evokes nothing but a “well, duh” reaction and we appear cruel for suggesting that any other scenario might possibly be the case.

But when you listen to the words of the temple ordinance and the scriptures relating to them, and you really dig into what was said about it at a time when Mormon leaders were much more comfortable openly discussing temple doctrines than they are at present; it quickly becomes apparent that the sealing is about much, much more than physical proximity or “being with” any particular individual.  It’s about this concept of a “patriarchal order”; and viewing oneself as a single link in an eternal chain; and I think one of the great missionary challenges of our time will be how to describe that in a way that sounds palatable to a generation of post-millennials who increasingly dismiss gender roles, don’t particularly value child-rearing, are becoming less interested in personal relationships, and view fulfillment in the here-and-now as more important than sacrificing for the sake of continuing a legacy that both pre-dates and can out-last them.

Edited September 25, 2017 by Just_A_Guy

[CV75]

2 hours ago, Always learning said:

 My family is very active in the church. I  I am a returned missionary and I  hold the priesthood and understand its purposes. But I've never been comfortable with any explanation that I have given to a nonmember about "why they will not be a together forever family after this life even though they love each other".    I do understand that it is because they are not sealed by the holy priesthood. But I'm looking for an explanation that is easier to understand by somebody  that does not believe in the priesthood or the Book of Mormon  or Joseph Smith.  My daughters boyfriend, who is not a member, asked for the same question last night. Any suggestions on how To answer this question best?

Just as a family cannot be together in the temple if each member does not have a recommend, so will families not be able to do certain things together if they are not sealed. Some of those things would include worshiping the Lord in His presence, learning together in His presence, doing what He would have exalted beings do together, etc. They might be able to do some things together as they might be able to descend to visit each other in various lower kingdoms, but they cannot do things together in a "fulness," and not in the Father's presence.

[The Folk Prophet]

10 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Just as a family cannot be together in the temple if each member does not have a recommend, so will families not be able to do certain things together if they are not sealed. Some of those things would include worshiping the Lord in His presence, learning together in His presence, doing what He would have exalted beings do together, etc. They might be able to do some things together as they might be able to descend to visit each other in various lower kingdoms, but they cannot do things together in a "fulness," and not in the Father's presence.

This is speculation. We really have no idea. The only aspect of forever families that we know is the scriptural continuation of seeds. Otherwise we have literally 0% understanding of it.

Edited September 25, 2017 by The Folk Prophet

[Vort]

We are mortal. We live in a mortal world. We make mortal contracts. Our personal contracts do not survive our death; modern governments do not recognize the concept of personhood after death. You cannot libel a dead man. In effect, our lives here are sealed off from what came before and what comes after. We make contracts and covenants and agreements, and we devise methods to enforce them. Such obligations exist in time, and in time only. No mortal law can affect the state of the spirit after death. Agreements, contracts, marriages, even biological relationships like parenthood, exist only in mortality. After death, they no longer exist for the departed spirit.

There is no power on earth that can reach beyond this life. But there is power in heaven that can do exactly that. This power is the sealing power of the Priesthood. Using that sealing power, certain covenants, arrangements, and relationships can survive death. And THAT is the promise we offer.

People have a naive idea that because they "love" each other and "want" to be together in the next life, that's as good as a marital contract. But those who believe this are in ignorance. They do not understand the nature of life after death. More importantly, they do not understand the nature of the eternal marital contract.

So really, the best and most truthful thing we can do is to tell people, "Your marriage will not survive your death unless you are sealed. Your family relationships will not survive death unless those relationships are formalized through sealing. We offer the blessings of sealing to all who wish to accept the conditions of those blessings." If they refuse to believe that teaching, all we can do is wait and hope for a change of heart.

[Rob Osborn]

2 hours ago, Always learning said:

 My family is very active in the church. I  I am a returned missionary and I  hold the priesthood and understand its purposes. But I've never been comfortable with any explanation that I have given to a nonmember about "why they will not be a together forever family after this life even though they love each other".    I do understand that it is because they are not sealed by the holy priesthood. But I'm looking for an explanation that is easier to understand by somebody  that does not believe in the priesthood or the Book of Mormon  or Joseph Smith.  My daughters boyfriend, who is not a member, asked for the same question last night. Any suggestions on how To answer this question best?

Its best to start with explaining/ teaching that salvation comes only through obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. Our church is the only authority currently on the earth to bind and seal on earth and in heaven ordinances that bring salvation. Without salvation marriage and families together mean nothing. From there you can teach that just like the process of of salvation from hell requires obedience and ordinances by proper authority so too must marriage be entered into by covenant and by the proper authority that can seal ordinances both on earth and in heaven. We as mere humans cant just wave a wand or raise a hand, having no authority from God and seal things into his kingdom, thereis no order nor logic to that. Neither can we just merely agree in our minds or verbally we wish to be with so and so and have it be binding in eternity. As much as we have made marriage a mere secular and civil process, its corrupted what marriage really is. Marriage used to be a wholly religious ordinance where covenants were bound with God. As men became corrupted along with his holy church the proper covenants and authority were removed. In our latter day our church has restored those holy covenants with and by the proper priesthood authority. It is this alone that can seal both on earth and heaven. Gods house is a house of order, we must obey his laws, not our own, if we seek a place in his kingdom with our chosen loved ones.

[Fether]

3 hours ago, Always learning said:

 My family is very active in the church. I  I am a returned missionary and I  hold the priesthood and understand its purposes. But I've never been comfortable with any explanation that I have given to a nonmember about "why they will not be a together forever family after this life even though they love each other".    I do understand that it is because they are not sealed by the holy priesthood. But I'm looking for an explanation that is easier to understand by somebody  that does not believe in the priesthood or the Book of Mormon  or Joseph Smith.  My daughters boyfriend, who is not a member, asked for the same question last night. Any suggestions on how To answer this question best?

I love the question! It's true! What if my whole family goes to the telestial kingdom? Will there be a big bad body guard angel telling me I can't stand next to my family members?? I doubt it!

This is how I have rationalized it.

D+C 19:6-12 teaches us that 'eternal'/'endless' is synonymous with 'God'. Now in this example it is referring to the phrase "eternal punishment". 

It may be that this extends to the phrase "eternal family". It means "God's family". All sealigs will eventually all be tied together and back to Adam. This is God's family. 

The phrase eternal family may also reference eternal progression as in a never ending size to your family

[zil]

2 hours ago, Anddenex said:

strait couples

[Just_A_Guy]

43 minutes ago, Fether said:

I love the question! It's true! What if my whole family goes to the telestial kingdom? Will there be a big bad body guard angel telling me I can't stand next to my family members?? I doubt it!

Just so.  Under the paradigm a few of our co-religionists seem to adopt—either the TK is synonymous with solitary confinement, or else TK members can see and socialize with everyone else in the TK *except* those inhabitants to whom they happen to have been related.

The first option strikes me as scripturally and doctrinally unsupportable.  The second option sets up a God who goes out of His way to be vindictive, and in the absence of a clear mechanical explanation as to whether, how, or why this would be so—I see no need for me to reconcile myself to such a vision.

Edited September 25, 2017 by Just_A_Guy

[The Folk Prophet]

19 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Just so.  Under the paradigm a few of our co-religionists seem to adopt—either the TK is synonymous with solitary confinement, or else TK members can see and socialize with everyone else in the TK *except* those inhabitants to whom they happen to have been related.

The first option strikes me as scripturally and doctrinally unsupportable.  The second option sets up a God who goes out of His way to be vindictive, and in the absence of a clear mechanical explanation as to whether, how, or why this would be so—I see no need for me to reconcile myself to such a vision.

I suspect, fwiw, that hanging out with telestial beings is its own reward. People who like Jerry Springer get Jerry Springer. I know, I know...a bit of a dated reference. But if Studio C can reference it...

 

[JohnsonJones]

The marital relations of a husband and wife will NOT be in effect in the other kingdoms outside the highest of the Celestial.

Now, they can still hang out together, be together, etc...but they CANNOT have those marital relations and have offspring.  Even if their bodies might be able to do something that copycats that process, they will not, as they will not be sinning in the other Kingdoms either.

They will not go counter to the laws of heaven, hence even if they recognize they were family members on Earth, if they are not sealed, there is no power or force of it in heaven.  They can still recognize they were families on earth, but as they are not under a force of the laws of heaven, it will not be so there, as they recognize the laws of heaven and abide by those rules. 

On the otherhand, I subscribe to the ideas of the Smiths (Joseph F. Smith, Joseph Fielding Smith..etc) who stated that those children that are under the bonds of sealing, but do not make the Celestial Kingdom can still go there, but would still have a body from a lower kingdom.  They would be able to be in the Celestial Kingdom through the sealing bonds, but not be participants of all the powers thereof, either of the servants or of the Kings and Queens of that degree of glory.  They would be relegated to the lowest degree of it, below that of the second degree of those that attained the glory but were not sealed, and obviously below that of those that attain the highest degree of glory in that Kingdom.

Contray to this though, I have sometimes wondered in that light, if sealing bonds actually pertain to those in lower kingdoms as well.  Even if one cannot act upon it, if they and their spouse end up in the Terrestrial Kingdom if the sealing bonds may still enact upon them (and hence upon families, for if we do all the temple work in theory, everyone on earth will be sealed into a family) even if they cannot act in accordance with certain marital acts that they would on this earth or in the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom.

Edited September 25, 2017 by JohnsonJones

[Rob Osborn]

Im pretty sure that in the end you will have those i  outer darkness on the one hand and families, sealed together on the other. There will be no such thing as being saved from hell and yet not be sealed to the ones you love or outside where they are. All the saved will be together as families. Thats the truth. All else is just opinion.

[CV75]

3 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

This is speculation. We really have no idea. The only aspect of forever families that we know is the scriptural continuation of seeds. Otherwise we have literally 0% understanding of it.

You may have no idea, but I wouldn't extrapolate that to "we."

I know that a family cannot be together in the temple if each member does not have a recommend. I extrapolate that into an eternal setting, with sealing in place of a "recommend."

I know from the scriptures that in exaltation, people worship the Lord in His presence, learn together in His presence, do what He would have exalted beings do together, etc.

They might be able to do some things together as they might be able to descend to visit each other in various lower kingdoms (is that what you refer to as speculation? I did say "might'), but they cannot do things together in a "fulness," and they who do not qualify cannot join them in the Father's presence.

 

[Vort]

11 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

There will be no such thing as being saved from hell and yet not be sealed to the ones you love or outside where they are. All the saved will be together as families. Thats the truth.

The Doctrine and Covenants disagrees with you. D&C 132:17 reads:

Quote

For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever.

 

Edited September 25, 2017 by Vort

[The Folk Prophet]

Just now, CV75 said:

You may have no idea, but I wouldn't extrapolate that to "we."

Depends on what is meant by "we". I expect Joseph Smith knew.

1 minute ago, CV75 said:

I know that a family cannot be together in the temple if each member does not have a recommend. I extrapolate that into an eternal setting, with sealing in place of a "recommend."

But your extrapolation may be mistaken.

1 minute ago, CV75 said:

I know from the scriptures that in exaltation, people worship the Lord in His presence, learn together in His presence, do what He would have exalted beings do together, etc.

But you don't know what that all entails...oh...and learn together? How do all knowing beings learn? Just out of curiosity.

2 minutes ago, CV75 said:

They might be able to do some things together as they might be able to descend to visit each other in various lower kingdoms (is that what you refer to as speculation? I did say "might'), but they cannot do things together in a "fulness," and they who do not qualify cannot join them in the Father's presence.

Yeah...might. We really have no idea of the details. We have no real understanding of the specifics of eternity. I stand by my "we".

[CV75]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Depends on what is meant by "we". I expect Joseph Smith knew.

But your extrapolation may be mistaken.

But you don't know what that all entails...oh...and learn together? How do all knowing beings learn? Just out of curiosity.

Yeah...might. We really have no idea of the details. We have no real understanding of the specifics of eternity. I stand by my "we".

LOL

[Rob Osborn]

3 hours ago, Vort said:

The Doctrine and Covenants disagrees with you. D&C 132:17 reads:

 

And yet, this doctrine was given before the doctrine of proxy work in the temple. According to this scripture no proxy work is possible and all the masses who ever married outside of Gods new and everlasting covenant of marriage must remain without exaltation for all eternity. It does say- "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."

So, either the D&C is right and our proxy marriages are wrong or the D&C is wrong and our proxy work in the temples is right.

My bet is that the D&C is both right and wrong. Right in that one indeed does have to be married by Gods word to be sealed for all eternity, and wrong in that the later revealed doctrine regarding proxy work allows the dead to indeed be given in marriage after death through a proxy sealing.

[Vort]

16 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

So, either the D&C is right and our proxy marriages are wrong or the D&C is wrong and our proxy work in the temples is right.

False dichotomy. Both are right. Dead people are not "out of the world"; that would be those who have been resurrected.

[Rob Osborn]

8 minutes ago, Vort said:

False dichotomy. Both are right. Dead people are not "out of the world"; that would be those who have been resurrected.

So, do all the spirits have to have all their temple proxy sealings done before they can be resurrected at Christs coming? Thats seems just about impossible not knowing all the billions who have passed on over thousands of years.

[person0]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

So, do all the spirits have to have all their temple proxy sealings done before they can be resurrected at Christs coming? Thats seems just about impossible not knowing all the billions who have passed on over thousands of years.

The answer to your question is yes:

Quote

We cannot do it all at once, but will have the 1,000 years of the millennium to do it in. In that time the work must be done in behalf of the dead of the previous 6,000 years, for all who need it. . . The ordinances for the salvation of the dead are mortal ordinances, because all these ordinances pertain to this life, and immortal beings cannot perform them. . . Some people may think that it is impossible for us to do this work for the dead because we have not the names of people who lived in ancient times. We have not the records, we do not know how to reach them from anything we have in this life . . . The great work of the millennium, of 1,000 years, will be for the salvation of these souls.
(Joseph Fielding Smith) emphasis added

The Lord’s meaning was clear, that in the resurrected state there can be no question among the seven brothers as to whose wife for eternity the woman shall be, since all except the first had married her for the duration of mortal life only. … In the resurrection, there will be no marrying nor giving in marriage; for all questions of marital status must be settled before that time, under the authority of the Holy Priesthood, which holds the power to seal in marriage for both time and eternity.”
(Jesus the Christ, p. 548.) emphasis added

Edited September 26, 2017 by person0

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, person0 said:

The answer to your question is yes:

But the resurrected will reign with Christ for the thousand years.

[Just_A_Guy]

13 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

And yet, this doctrine was given before the doctrine of proxy work in the temple. 

Not really.  The first recorded proxy sealing, of Joseph C. Kingsbury to his deceased wife Caroline, took place in March of 1843; and there is strong but not-definitive evidence that Delcina Sherman was sealed to her dead husband Lyman before marrying Joseph Smith for time by July of 1842.  ()

Either way you slice it, the prospect of proxy sealings was known by July 1843 when our current D&C 132 was transcribed.

Edited September 26, 2017 by Just_A_Guy

[Rob Osborn]

3 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Not really.  The first recorded proxy sealing, of Joseph C. Kingsbury to his deceased wife Caroline, took place in March of 1843; and there is strong but not-definitive evidence that Delcina Sherman was sealed to her dead husband Lyman before marrying Joseph Smith for time by July of 1842.  ()

Either way you slice it, the prospect of proxy sealings was known by July 1843 when our current D&C 132 was transcribed.

So, the revelation of 132 isnt exactly correct then, it kind of needs some updating/clarification.