Why must we be married to reach the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?

[Guest intra]

For example, in an effort to "disprove" the idea of God having a wife, you included scriptures talking about the Church as Christ's bride. 

look again, i did no such thing. 

i quoted Paul talking about marriage and i quoted Jesus Christ talking with His disciples about marriage, because the subject of the thread is marriage, and anyone who regards Christ as Lord and Paul as one of His apostles ought to take into consideration what they said of marriage. 

i quoted Hosea - whom you agree is a prophet of God - where God speaking through Him calls Israel His bride. this relationship is echoed in the books of other prophets that you also affirm speak by the Spirit of God, is it not? 

i have not "tried to disprove" anything, but to establish what the scriptures say - the same scriptures you affirm are the Word of God.

if they put in your mind doubt or guilt, it is not from me. 

i am concerned that you falsely accuse me in such a way - what is it troubling you? 

surely the LDS faith is completely reconcilable with all of the scripture it recognizes, and is not self-contradictory? 

that is why i am here, to learn and be taught how these things agree. 

we ought all be able to "give a reason for our hope" don't you agree? 

so my hope is that in this section of the forum, we can all be blessed and edified by seeing how that all scripture is harmonized, that no doubt may be found in any of us :) 

 

[Guest intra]

this is getting very sidetracked, and i am afraid brother Vort you are being tempted to personally attack me. i would be happy to talk in PM over all this, so that the right discussion of the thread topic can continue without being interrupted by what you may make into a personal dispute. 
just send me a message. 

with that, i apologize for any derailment and unless personally addressed will leave this thread to it's own conclusion. 

forgive me for the intrusion. 

[Just_A_Guy]

maybe you don't understand who Ashereh is. 

have a read: 

Asherah the lost bride of Yahweh

 

 

That seems like a bit of a dodge.  The bottom line is that the sin in 1 Kings 16 was for establishing worship of Asherah and Baal.  Yes, "Asherah" was a generic name representing the feminine consort of many Canaanite dieties over the years--including, at times, Jehovah.  She was often symbolized by flowers and trees.  Was Solomon wrong for putting imagery representative of a consort to a supreme God, in his temple?  If so, why did Jehovah nevertheless accept the Temple of Solomon?

 

Or did he?

 

indeed Christ was crucified under the charge that He made Himself equal with the Father, and He did not deny it. neither did He say that there is any other God but one -- He said "I and the Father are one" and "I am in the Father and the Father is in me." He affirmed that the greatest commandment of the Law is to love the Father with everything, and He also accepted worship - a thing that not even any angel dare to do.

 

And He talked about the Father in the third person; forcing orthodox Christians in following centuries--who could not or would not contextualize the earlier Old Testament sayings--to come up with this notion of a "trinity", even doctoring Biblical texts (Johannine Comma, anyone?) to make it all fit.

 

Jewish othodoxy's insistence that there is only one God isn't because of slantwise interpretation, but it is plainly said many times. it is not a single or a couple of times in some parable, but throughout. here are just a handful, though there are many more scriptures: . . .

now, we might ask, how did Christ's apostles understand this? . . . .

more importantly than this, though, is what did Jesus say? for He is the foundation of all our faith: . . .

who am i to contradict the Christ?

 

The Old Testament references to which you cite are nearly all directed towards calling Israel away from worship of Canaanite gods (or affirming the declarant's having so turned away).  Paul is absolutely correct--to us there IS only one God the Father, and one Lord (Jesus).  James' passage is not an exposition on the nature of God; rather, he alludes to the belief that God is one as being acceptable but goes on to his main point, which is that even the devils believe and therefore mere "belief" is not enough.  The story you relate in Mark 12, as you note, draws heavily on the shema, which was given in the context of emphasizing to Mosaic Israel that they must reject the pagan gods of Egypt--and of course, Judea in this time was a Roman province, and Rome had its own pantheon of false gods who were to be similarly eschewed.  But the primary thrust of the story isn't the nature of God; it's the importance of loving and serving God and one's fellowman.  To the extent that the interrogator may be trying to draw Jesus out on the nature of God, he seems to be trying to trip Jesus up ("Yeah, Jesus, there IS only one god, and He's in heaven and you're here, so clearly you aren't God") and Jesus, rather than complimenting his response, is basically refusing to engage further and dismissing the questioner with a "meh, close enough" (some Bible translations, like yours, describe the interrogator's response was "wise"; but the Greek term is ambiguous and other translations render it as "discreet" or "prudent").

 

 

For example, in an effort to "disprove" the idea of God having a wife, you included scriptures talking about the Church as Christ's bride.

 

look again, i did no such thing. 

. . . .

i have not "tried to disprove" anything, but to establish what the scriptures say - the same scriptures you affirm are the Word of God.

if they put in your mind doubt or guilt, it is not from me. 

 

Intra, I respect your knowledge and have been edified by many of your interpretations--but these protestations lack both accuracy and candor, and everyone reading this forum knows it.

 

Vort is correct that this is not the proper forum to try to undermine LDS teaching.  It isn't that we can't handle criticism or feel your arguments are irrefutable.  There is a time and place for such discussions--but it's not here.  This particular forum is geared towards Mormons who have already accepted the basics of LDS belief and are interested in fleshing it out and seeing how all of its pieces mesh together; and what you've been doing is a little analogous to having a university course on quantum mechanics in which one of the students keeps raising his hand and denying the existence of atoms. 

 

Again, I value much of what you've contributed so far and hope you continue to participate. (There are several non-Mormons who regularly participate here, and one of them is even a moderator.)  But for those specific posts where you're really trying to suggest that orthodox LDS teaching is non-biblical, I would respectfully suggest that you save those posts for another venue.  You may enjoy http://www.mormondialogue.org/.

 

Have a blessed weekend. :)

Edited December 13, 2014 by Just_A_Guy

[fer4ret]

I am a recent convert to the church, 2011. I wish dearly to get married. I am told that I am limited in my spiritual progress without marriage and there are many earthly recommended appointments not available to me because I am single. I am well educated with a lifetime of great experience and wish to serve at a leadership level. Where is the church support for those fit members in their 60 plus age group who desire marriage? 

[Auzylee]

The new and everlasting covenant of marriage is also a saving ordnance, we can't expect to receive a fullness of Gods blessings unless we receive all of the ordinances required for our salvation.

[Guest]

Well, they're just not really satisfying my question but I guess it's one of those "We can never truly know" questions.  I am questioning why God it made it the way it is.  Only he knows this.  I guess a part of me is questioning whether or not this is truly from God and not from man but I will try to ignore that.

You may be correct saying it's one of those can-never-truly-know questions (if you mean while in this mortal sphere). But don't lose hope because on the other hand you may come to an awareness of the answer(s). Just because no one has succeeded in satisfying you today doesn't necessarily preclude someone helping you in the future. And if a part of you is questioning whether this is truly from God (or man-contrived) that's alright, too. None of us on this forum (regardless of what category our intentions fall into) can give you the knowledge, but maybe one will say something to help you decide how to proceed.  :)

 

I just don't understand why this is a requirement.  Why isn't our own righteousness and relationship with God the determining factor?

But I just thought of a question I'd like you to answer for me if you feel good about doing so. In terms of the title you gave this thread, how do you personally envision the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?

Edited October 1, 2015 by UT.starscoper

[Guest]

I am a recent convert to the church, 2011. I wish dearly to get married. I am told that I am limited in my spiritual progress without marriage and there are many earthly recommended appointments not available to me because I am single. I am well educated with a lifetime of great experience and wish to serve at a leadership level. Where is the church support for those fit members in their 60 plus age group who desire marriage? 

What specifically are you told about your spiritual progress being limited without marriage? There are certainly opportunities for you to serve at a leadership level as a single member. Tell me more.

[JojoBag]

I just don't understand why this is a requirement.  Why isn't our own righteousness and relationship with God the determining factor?  

 

It's a commandment from God.  That's all I need to know.

[brothermason]

God commands it because our faith is supposed to be in relationship with others, and marriage is the preeminent way that people come together and form communities.