To me the idea of eternal marriage is driven by the human ego. I especially don't like the language of "claiming my wife/husband" as if your spouse somehow is your property. I think people lived in fear of losing their loved ones and being emotionally impacted by the death rate at that time, the prophet probably searched for a way to find peace of mind. On the surface it seems like a good idea and if you don't think about it deeply, you will embrace wholeheartedly because it gives you hope to see your family members again. But in reality, sealing your family together basically means bringing your attachments from this world into the next life instead of submitting ones will to the will of God and maybe embracing something better? After all, we all lived together before we came to earth as spirits. Why in the world, God would pull us apart after death? If both husband and wife are righteous, why wouldn't they continue hanging out together in the Spirit World? Light clings to light. The idea that you need some kind of authority to keep them together becomes shallow. What father would separate their children and won't let them play together because they lack some seal on them? We can only separate from the loved ones and God by our own choice and unrighteous behavior.
Yes, I think this is very correct. Sealing is very shallow and really makes no sense. It also is hard for us to realize, but back then death surrounded them everywhere. Women died in childbirth. Children died in youth. Rampant sicknesses would take people in mass. Death was everywhere. This idea "feels good", but it is assuming that our understanding is greater than God's. I like your example though. What father wouldn't let his kids play together unless they had a special mark. Perfect example.
Agreed. God isn’t going to separate us. The idea of eternal families is a solution to a fear of losing what we have. I’m concerned that clinging to these things could possibly prevent us from fully coming to God. Luke 14:26&33 Jesus said we must forsake all we have to follow Him.
3 Nephi 11:40 And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, Matthew 7:17-20 KJV - Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. The lie of "eternal" marriage is of the very tree that bore polygamy.
@@DangerMountain It does appear to be part of it. If we look at church history then we can see a slow and steady change from a simple gospel to a much more complicated one. With one step at a time, you can get very far off the path.
its interesting that the chapter heading in mark 12 in the LDS scriptures says that Jesus talks about eternal marriage. you read it and he says nothing at all about it.
Yes. This is how people get "sucked in". They interpret everything their way and then they think everything is so obvious that it is strange that people disagree with them. If it is speaking about eternal marriage then why don't Jews believe in it, or other Christian groups? Why did it take until Nauvoo for Joseph to teach it?
@@matthewbrown3722 I think it is scripture. Joseph was a remarkable person who God could work with as he wasn't tied to the philosophies of men. I am not sure if everything in there is literal, however this is the same with the Bible. Some things may be more an allegory than an exact story. Overall though, I do believe it. I believe Joseph's job was to bring forth the Book of Mormon and then he essentially got carried away with many other things. God did tell Joseph that he would have no strength in temporal matters (D&C 24:9), however that is essentially all he did in Nauvoo. I believe that almost all of Nauvoo is rotten and Kirtland is a mix of truth and error. I believe that God wanted Joseph to start a church to be based on the Book of Mormon. Their is an unpublished revelation which says this however I would have to find it.
@@uncorrelatedmormonism I agree with your assessment. I believe the Book of Mormon contains the full gospel of Jesus Christ. And I agree that Joseph Smith had frailties and ambition that got the better of him. He was so warned by the Lord. I too have been on a path of discovery. I have appreciated much of your content. It sounds like you are also on a journey of discovery, it is very difficult to see through much of the indoctrination of the Church. Although I can say that, of the Book of Mormon denominations, members of the LDS Church, are the most receptive of the true gospel of Jesus Christ. Many other sects rely very heavily on scriptures.
Jacob 2:27-30: "Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none; For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. 1 Nephi 7:1-5: "And now I would that ye might know, that after my father, Lehi, had made an end of prophesying concerning his seed, it came to pass that the Lord spake unto him again, saying that it was not meet for him, Lehi, that he should take his family into the wilderness alone; but that his sons should take daughters to wife, that they might raise up seed unto the Lord in the land of promise.
What Jesus says on the subject. Matthew 22:23-30 ESV The same day Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection, and they asked him a question, 24] saying, "Teacher, Moses said, 'If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother.' 25] Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died, and having no offspring left his wife to his brother. 26] So too the second and third, down to the seventh. 27] After them all, the woman died. 28] In the resurrection, therefore, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had her." 29] But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30] For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.
21:03 - So there is the conflict who is right, Jesus or Joseph Smith and those who followed him? As far as the rest, the Bible gives us clear teachings on the afterlife as you have read in Mark, and I would also suggest reading Matthew 22-24.
Chief midegah of the ojibwe nation and the birch bark scrolls. Worth a check. Backs up the book of Mormon and the bible. More native American documents are coming forth this September. Ironically, they have been ignored by the lds church despite backing some of its claims. In regards to eternal marriage, if God only reveals it to a few, then so be it. The current scriptures aren't "complete", it's only what has survived/some of what's survived. There's plenty of indication (even in the bible) that many things weren't written down but spoken orally.
I just watched a video from Adam Boyle who went over those records. They are deficient in a number of ways and seem to just be a copy of LDS theology mixed with some different things.
I think eternal marriage makes sense from the perspective that heaven is simply a return to the garden of Eden from genesis. God put man and woman together before the fall, not after- however that doesn’t mean I think it’ll look anything like it does here Honestly, we have no idea what heaven looks like. Jesus said marriage won’t happen in the resurrection so we know that for sure. But there’s a long time after the resurrection. Who knows what plans god has for us after this life? I do believe that the insistance of there being eternal marriage, especially statements like “heaven won’t be heaven without my spouse.” Are incredibly narcissistic and shortsighted. Is not the call of god to love our neighbor as we love ourselves? Do you not think that in the perfect heaven, we will all love eachother with a perfect and therefor equal love? In that case, wouldn’t having someone you love “more” than everyone else defeat the entire point? Heaven isn’t taking you away from your love, it’s expanding it. You will not be estranged from your wife in heaven, but at that point, when you’re back in union with god (fulfilling the symbol of marriage), what even is the point? It’s not an expression of love because you already know you love your wife, along with everyone else in heaven! Not for reproduction purposes (tho who knows, as Adam and Eve were commanded to reproduce prior to the fall.). So, the point is If marriage is there, it’ll be amazing ! If marriage isn’t there… it’ll be amazing!
Yes I think this is a good perspective. If two people wanted to pair up in the next life, then I doubt God would stop them. We know so little that I don't think it makes sense to assume the Mormon ideas of the next life. I would amend what you wrote slightly though. Before Adam was married to Eve then Adam was alone. Eve was then physically created from Adam and they were married. I haven't really looked into this much, however I believe this is deeply symbolic. Men and Women are like yin and yang. They are two sides to the same thing. I believe there is a special thing when a man and woman become "one flesh" again like Adam was in the Garden. I also wouldn't be surprised if somehow we go to one flesh somehow again. For instance, if we are not going to have children eternally, which I don't think we are, then what is a "male" and what is a "female"? Why have a distinction if none of it matters anymore?
@@uncorrelatedmormonismI’m not sure if we will become literal one flesh again in the next life. Eve being taken out of Adam wasn’t some sort of punishment, or symbolic separation of a whole human into two parts, as it happened prior to the fall, and Gods reason was “it is not good for man to be alone.” Now some argue that he said this because well, Adam was literally alone. But that’s where they’re wrong, Adam wasn’t alone, he was with God, he walked with God. That’s the furthest thing possible from being alone. Yet god still created a woman for him to marry. I’m not sure if this is scriptural, it could be explained in a New Testament epistle but I’m not sure, but marriage is meant to be the symbol between the union of God and the Church. As a man and a woman begin apart from eachother, they are United and become one flesh. In the same way, while we are now separated from God, when we choose to follow him we unite and become one with him. I see no reason for this symbol to end. Perhaps in the garden, tho Adam was with God, he was not in union with god. However under Christ. The new Adam, we will be, and therefor the symbol marriage represents will no longer be necessary. Who knows! What I do know is that as long as the one I love is there with me, it doesn’t matter what “title” we have. She’s there. I think the main point christ was pushing to the Sadducees was the fact that heaven isn’t like earth, the question is completely senseless because whatever purpose marriage serves on earth will logically be redundant in heaven. That doesn’t necessarily mean other, higher practices, won’t exist there
13:31- So I do not understand how you can uphold Smith and the teachings of the others that are in direct conflict with Biblical teachings, how then can one conclude that Joseph Smith was anything other than a false prophet?
@@uncorrelatedmormonism I watched most of the video, however I read the comments section and you uphold Smith and the BOM. Smith and the BOM clearly contradict. God is not a God of chaos, and contradiction is chaos, so how do you resolve the contradiction?
@@darinbracy8433 It sounds like you are confused. The Book of Mormon stands on its own. If I do the work of God today and then tomorrow I make a terrible mistake does that negate what I did today?
I just heard him (Patrick) say this in the King Follet video: " I admire J.S. as a man and as a prophet. However, that doesn't mean he got EVERYTHING right." ... And I would agree along with scripture that God's prophets are not perfect. They fail. They fall. Joseph PUBLISHED chastisements from god. Does this mean he was a false prophet? I don't believe so!
@@uncorrelatedmormonism It cannot stand on it's own. One because the Bible clearly states that it cannot, second then it brings God into a system of chaos, because both cannot be the Word of God if they contradict each other. Your analogy is not proper. You are not God, God does not make mistakes, if God makes mistakes then He is not God, He is just another man, and as you have stated we should not follow men.
17:19 - Two becoming one flesh. - The joining is united in purpose, not in physicality. The woman was made as a helper to the man, hence they were united in purpose to do the will of God.
Eternal marriage and eternal families are most definitely in the scriptures if you have eyes to see and ears to hear. The Abrahamic covenant is a family and marriage covenant. Abraham could not have a posterity without a wife or marriage, and the same covenant was promised to his righteous posterity. The new and everlasting covenant of marriage is essentially the Abrahamic covenant. The Father and Son and the child relationship to God is everywhere in the scriptures. If we do the will of the Father, we can be Christ's family. (Mark 3:33-35) And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren? 34 And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.
@uncorrelatedmormonism Again, if you have eyes to see and ears to hear, it's plain as day, just like Nephi said. This is one of my favorite scriptures that helped me to see... when I admitted that Nephi was correct and speaking directly to me, things began to change. (2 Nephi 32:7) And now I, Nephi, cannot say more; the Spirit stoppeth mine utterance, and I am left to mourn because of the unbelief, and the wickedness, and the ignorance, and the stiffneckedness of men; for they will not search knowledge, nor understand great knowledge, when it is given unto them in plainness, even as plain as word can be. Many things are very plain and I mean very plain. Such as Mark 3:33-35. And when we have unbelief, the same scriptures are not so plain, just like Nephi said.
@@MarkHigbee Conversations with you are so one sided. I present numerous scriptures, quotes, and events to illustrate a point. You respond with something like "if you have eyes to see and ears to hear, it's plain as day" and then twist scriptures to mean whatever you want. I am honestly really glad that you have found what you consider to be the truth. I hope someday that things can be so easy for me. Anyways, I likely will never respond to you again since it is so pointless. There is never even a discussion, just more of the same from you. I truly have no hard feelings and wish you the best in your life.
@uncorrelatedmormonism Feel free to explain how the Abrahamic covenant is not a marriage and family covenant. I would like to know how Abraham could have a posterity numbered like to stars without a wife or marriage.
@uncorrelatedmormonism You like to claim there are no scriptures that back some of the LDS doctrine, and when I share some that do that are undeniable, you reject them. This is why I talk about having eyes to see and ears to hear. This is a phrase that Jesus used a lot with unbelievers, so I barrowed it from him.
