Why is marriage so important if Jesus didn't get married

[The Folk Prophet]

1 minute ago, anatess2 said:

TFP.  To be GOD, one must be married.  That we believe.

No..."we" don't.

As "we" have said, many times now, "we" don't believe that Christ was married as a spirit. "We" don't believe the Holy Ghost was or is married.

What you meant to says was that you believe this. "We" believe nothing of the sort.

[anatess2]

23 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

No..."we" don't.

As "we" have said, many times now, "we" don't believe that Christ was married as a spirit. "We" don't believe the Holy Ghost was or is married.

What you meant to says was that you believe this. "We" believe nothing of the sort.

You don't believe that we have to be married to be in the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?  If so, then you believe that you can be God and not qualify to be on the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?  Just trying to follow your logic here.

By the way, just to be clear on my word usage.  I used "we" as "LDS" and not just "you and me" in the previous post.  Was I mistaken to think that the LDS believes that you have to be married to attain the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?  I used You on this post to refer to you - TFP - and not you as in "LDS besides me".

 

By the way... you were quoted as saying you can be "partially" saved and not married.  There's no such thing as "partially" saved.  Salvation is that process that makes you clean.  No unclean thing can enter heaven, therefore we needed Christ's Atonement.  We can't be partially clean.  It's either your sins are forgiven or they're not.  The Atonement is made at our baptism and confirmation.  At that point, when we covenant to follow Christ, we are saved.  Anything we do beyond that is for our exaltation.  And that includes marriage.

 

Edited June 10, 2016 by anatess2

[anatess2]

10 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Let me put it another way....  If anyone qualified to be exempt it would have been Christ....

But that feeds the point... If Christ was not exempt from Baptism there is no logic in this world that can make him exempt from the other ordinances that are required for salvation or exaltation

 

10 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm afraid I'll need some sort of logical support behind this to even consider accepting it. How could Christ possibly be exempt from keeping the commandments? How can that possibly make any sense whatsoever? God is the only one that's allowed to sin?

Christ is not exempt in the way you are talking about here.

Rather, Christ is already God.  He did not become un-God when he became mortal.  He is fully man as he is fully God.  The dual nature of Christ - he is subject to all the mortal weaknesses at the same time that his spirit has already attained exaltation and didn't need mortal weaknesses and mortal ordinances to CHANGE his spirit to a clean/exalted one.

Think about it... baptism is the ordinance that expresses our covenant to follow Christ and accept his atoning sacrifice.  It is weird to think that Jesus needs to be baptized so He can save Himself.  He was baptized to fulfill all righteousness.  Because it is baptism and confirmation (baptized by John the Baptist, confirmed by the Father through the Holy Ghost) that IS THE SALVIFIC ORDINANCES.  The Sacrament at the Last Supper that Christ also performed is the ordinance that is a reminder of our baptismal covenants... necessary for our salvation.

Any other ordinances besides those - all the things we do at the temple for ourselves - are not salvific anymore.  They go beyond that.  Eternal Marriage is not a salvific ordinance.  It is an ordinance for the organization of the heavens - exaltation.

Therefore, the speculative logic is - Christ is an Exalted Being.  He is God.  Being God, He already has an Eternal Companion before He faced The Father and said "Here I am.  Send me.".

[The Folk Prophet]

2 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

You don't believe that we have to be married to be in the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?  

Where on earth do you draw that from anything I have said, and what LDS person could possibly hold that view?

I didn't say anything even close to that. Read more carefully.

5 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

If so, then you believe that you can be God and not qualify to be on the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?  Just trying to follow your logic here.

That depends on what you mean by "qualify", as I've already addressed. But in short, yes, one can be God without having qualified in all regards yet for the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom, as is clearly and obviously the case with the Holy Ghost and the pre-mortal Christ, not to mention Adam and the other "gods" who helped create the earth. Obviously.

There are 2 points that one can draw conclusions from. 1. Jesus and the Holy Ghost were gods in the premortal life, were part of the Godhead, and were and are designated as our God. 2. We must be married to be in the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom and to gain our exaltation and inherit all that the Father hath, etc.

From this we can conclude one of two things. 1. Being a "god" and a member of the Godhead and God to a population of beings doesn't require having yet achieved the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom including marriage, etc. or: 2. Christ and the Holy Ghost were married as Spirits.

I take the first logical path. You're taking the second. The problem with the second is it is contradictory to known principles that you have to twist in order to meet the claim. Marriage is an ordinance that is performed in this life. It has been proclaimed such, repeatedly. It is, contrary to what you've said, a saving ordinance. And Christ did those things that the Father commanded in this life to fulfill all righteousness. To take your path we have to deny these principles, among others, or make Christ an exception. But Christ, Himself, showed that He was not an exception. He obeyed all the commandments of the Father.

Moreover, the second logical path fails immediately because one of the other known doctrinal requirements for the Celestial Kingdom is the having of a physical body. Clearly and, I cannot reiterate enough, obviously the conclusions you're drawing don't work.

These ideas are not obscure. They are plain and repeatedly taught. Christ came to earth, the same as us, to get a body, to fulfill the commandments of the Father, and to partake of the sacred ordinances of Salvation.

The only logical conclusion that fits with the other teachings of the church is that being a "god" (and God and a member of a Godhead) is a different thing than being exalted to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom.

3 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

By the way, just to be clear on my word usage.  I used "we" as "LDS" and not just "you and me" in the previous post.  Was I mistaken to think that the LDS believes that you have to be married to attain the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?  I used You on this post to refer to you - TFP - and not you as in "LDS besides me".

I understand that you meant "we" as in LDS. LDS teachings to not teach these things you're proposing and "we" (LDS) do not en masse believe them. They are your philosophies.

I love how these off-the-wall philosophies of individuals based on their own wacky sense of logic and bearing no resemblance to the actual teachings of the church somehow become the royal what "we" believe.

Credit to @Traveler. As much as his philosophies can bear some of the wackiest logic (imo), at least he fairly consistently puts it in terms of "I believe".

[The Folk Prophet]

2 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Any other ordinances besides those - all the things we do at the temple for ourselves - are not salvific anymore.  They go beyond that.  Eternal Marriage is not a salvific ordinance.  It is an ordinance for the organization of the heavens - exaltation.

Repeating things that are wrong does not make them less wrong.

[anatess2]

47 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Where on earth do you draw that from anything I have said, and what LDS person could possibly hold that view?

I didn't say anything even close to that. Read more carefully.

That depends on what you mean by "qualify", as I've already addressed. But in short, yes, one can be God without having qualified in all regards yet for the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom, as is clearly and obviously the case with the Holy Ghost and the pre-mortal Christ, not to mention Adam and the other "gods" who helped create the earth. Obviously.

There are 2 points that one can draw conclusions from. 1. Jesus and the Holy Ghost were gods in the premortal life, were part of the Godhead, and were and are designated as our God. 2. We must be married to be in the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom and to gain our exaltation and inherit all that the Father hath, etc.

From this we can conclude one of two things. 1. Being a "god" and a member of the Godhead and God to a population of beings doesn't require having yet achieved the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom including marriage, etc. or: 2. Christ and the Holy Ghost were married as Spirits.

I take the first logical path. You're taking the second. The problem with the second is it is contradictory to known principles that you have to twist in order to meet the claim. Marriage is an ordinance that is performed in this life. It has been proclaimed such, repeatedly. It is, contrary to what you've said, a saving ordinance. And Christ did those things that the Father commanded in this life to fulfill all righteousness. To take your path we have to deny these principles, among others, or make Christ an exception. But Christ, Himself, showed that He was not an exception. He obeyed all the commandments of the Father.

Moreover, the second logical path fails immediately because one of the other known doctrinal requirements for the Celestial Kingdom is the having of a physical body. Clearly and, I cannot reiterate enough, obviously the conclusions you're drawing don't work.

These ideas are not obscure. They are plain and repeatedly taught. Christ came to earth, the same as us, to get a body, to fulfill the commandments of the Father, and to partake of the sacred ordinances of Salvation.

The only logical conclusion that fits with the other teachings of the church is that being a "god" (and God and a member of a Godhead) is a different thing than being exalted to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom.

I understand that you meant "we" as in LDS. LDS teachings to not teach these things you're proposing and "we" (LDS) do not en masse believe them. They are your philosophies.

I love how these off-the-wall philosophies of individuals based on their own wacky sense of logic and bearing no resemblance to the actual teachings of the church somehow become the royal what "we" believe.

Credit to @Traveler. As much as his philosophies can bear some of the wackiest logic (imo), at least he fairly consistently puts it in terms of "I believe".

Okay, we're talking beyond each other.  We can't understand each other if we continue to do that.

FIRST OF ALL:  I made sure that MY FIRST STATEMENT in this entire thread is this:  "Christ may be married, he may not.  We don't know.".  Therefore, everything I say here is speculative and I have used that word many times in my posts.  This speculation stems from my logical interpolation of certain teachings.  I have never, ever, ever impressed upon anyone that my belief should be believed by anyone.  At the same time, I do not appreciate it when you think I have a "wacky sense of logic" for coming to that conclusion.  I usually just let that fly... but being accused of having a "wacky sense of logic" can get me fired as a programmer.

 

" Where on earth do you draw that from anything I have said, and what LDS person could possibly hold that view? "

This is what I said:

You don't believe that we have to be married to be in the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?  If so, then you believe that you can be God and not qualify to be on the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?  Just trying to follow your logic here.

That was a question.  An either-or one.  You stated:   "we" don't believe that Christ was married as a spirit. "We" don't believe the Holy Ghost was or is married.

You put "we" in quotes.  So, I wasn't sure if you meant "we" as in "you and me" or "we" as in "LDS" or whatever "we" in quotes means.  So in my post, I clarified how I used the words we and you.

From your statement, I understood the quoted "we" to be "you and me" as a statement that says "you may believe this but I don't".  These are the 2 logical paths I see for your divergence from my logic:  1.) Either you believe we don't need to be married to attained the highest level of the CK, or 2.) you believe that you can be God and not qualify for the highest level of the CK   I was trying to follow your logic.  I wanted to know which logical path you chose so I can follow it.  That's why I made sure my usage of "you" is clear that it is only what "TFP" believe and not what the "LDS" believe to make this more understandable to me.

But, for some reason, you didn't see the question mark.  Or you took it as a rhetorical question.  Or something.  But it's okay, you explained it in the next paragraphs... You believe you can be God and not qualify for the highest level of the CK.

That's all you had to say.  I understand that logic.  I take a different path.  I believe God is God.  There are 3 persons in One God.  Father, Son, Holy Ghost.  Adam is not one of them.  Father, Son, Holy Ghost are ONE.  I take that as everything that The Father has, the Son and the Holy Ghost have also.  So, as we (LDS) believe in Heavenly Mother, I believe Christ and the Holy Ghost have their Eternal Companions as well.

You believe that we have to have THIS mortal body to be married.  I believe that is only applicable to US in our Plan of Happiness that God drew for us in pre-mortal existence.  Everything beyond that is speculation.   Such as - How did the Father, Christ, and the Holy Ghost become God?  Did they also have to go through their own mortal probation to attain Godhood?  Or did they have a different Plan of Happiness in their Progression?  Whatever the answer is - I believe they got married in this phase of their progression.

And about the Holy Ghost not having a body.  I don't believe that he does not have one.  I believe that He chose (as the Father chooses - they are One) to not be in that form in the same manner that Christ chose not to be in His spirit body to gain a mortal one.  In the Transfiguration, He chose to be in His spirit body to talk to God, so it is not that He doesn't have one before He was born of Mary either... unless you believe God gave Him one at the Transfiguration event, or that the Transfiguration event was not His spirit body.

And yes... once again... this is speculation.  Just because it doesn't match yours doesn't mean it's stupid.  Stop being a jerk about it.

Edited June 10, 2016 by anatess2

[Traveler]

Are we folling Christ if we marry in mortality and reject all logic and reason that he was married in mortality?

 

The Traveler 

[Traveler]

Are we following Christ if we marry in mortality and reject all logic and reason that he was married in mortality?

 

The Traveler 

Edited June 10, 2016 by Traveler

[anatess2]

8 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Are we folling Christ if we marry in mortality and reject all logic and reason that he was married in mortality?

 

The Traveler 

Yes, we are following Christ if we believe Christ was already married (and already God and already perfected and already exalted and already everything else) before he was born of Mary so he didn't have to get married in mortality.

Edited June 10, 2016 by anatess2

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Are we folling Christ if we marry in mortality and reject all logic and reason that he was married in mortality?

 

The Traveler 

Yes, we are following Christ if we believe Christ was already married (and already God and already perfected and already exalted and already everything else) so he didn't have to get married in mortality.

[anatess2]

56 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Repeating things that are wrong does not make them less wrong.

Tell me how the sealing ordinance wipes away your sins.

Or, probably a better question:  Explain to me what your understanding is of SALVATION.

[Traveler]

6 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Yes, we are following Christ if we believe Christ was already married (and already God and already perfected and already exalted and already everything else) so he didn't have to get married in mortality.

What do you think of the scripture that says "Though he was the Son yet learned he obedience by the things that he suffered?

 

The Traveler 

[anatess2]

duplicate.

C'mon programmers!  It's not hard to put a duplicate filter!

And you can run indexing without stomping all over your live system.

Yes, yes, yes... I'm just ranting.  Don't mind me.

Edited June 10, 2016 by anatess2

[Traveler]

6 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Yes, we are following Christ if we believe Christ was already married (and already God and already perfected and already exalted and already everything else) so he didn't have to get married in mortality.

What do you think of the scripture that says "Though he was the Son yet learned he obedience by the things that he suffered?

 

The Traveler 

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

Okay, we're talking beyond each other.  We can't understand each other if we continue to do that.

FIRST OF ALL:  I made sure that MY FIRST STATEMENT in this entire thread is this:  "Christ may be married, he may not.  We don't know.".  Therefore, everything I say here is speculative and I have used that word many times in my posts.  This speculation stems from my logical interpolation of certain teachings.  I have never, ever, ever impressed upon anyone that my belief should be believed by anyone.  At the same time, I do not appreciate it when you think I have a "wacky sense of logic" for coming to that conclusion.  I usually just let that fly... but being accused of having a "wacky sense of logic" can get me fired as a programmer.

 

" Where on earth do you draw that from anything I have said, and what LDS person could possibly hold that view? "

This is what I said:

You don't believe that we have to be married to be in the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?  If so, then you believe that you can be God and not qualify to be on the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?  Just trying to follow your logic here.

That was a question.  An either-or one.  You stated:   "we" don't believe that Christ was married as a spirit. "We" don't believe the Holy Ghost was or is married.

You put "we" in quotes.  So, I wasn't sure if you meant "we" as in "you and me" or "we" as in "LDS" or whatever "we" in quotes means.  So in my post, I clarified how I used the words we and you.

From your statement, I understood the quoted "we" to be "you and me" as a statement that says "you may believe this but I don't".  These are the 2 logical paths I see for your divergence from my logic:  1.) Either you believe we don't need to be married to attained the highest level of the CK, or 2.) you believe that you can be God and not qualify for the highest level of the CK   I was trying to follow your logic.  I wanted to know which logical path you chose so I can follow it.  That's why I made sure my usage of "you" is clear that it is only what "TFP" believe and not what the "LDS" believe to make this more understandable to me.

But, for some reason, you didn't see the question mark.  Or you took it as a rhetorical question.  Or something.  But it's okay, you explained it in the next paragraphs... You believe you can be God and not qualify for the highest level of the CK.

That's all you had to say.  I understand that logic.  I take a different path.  I believe God is God.  There are 3 persons in One God.  Father, Son, Holy Ghost.  Adam is not one of them.  Father, Son, Holy Ghost are ONE.  I take that as everything that The Father has, the Son and the Holy Ghost have also.  So, as we (LDS) believe in Heavenly Mother, I believe Christ and the Holy Ghost have their Eternal Companions as well.

You believe that we have to have THIS mortal body to be married.  I believe that is only applicable to US in our Plan of Happiness that God drew for us in pre-mortal existence.  Everything beyond that is speculation.   Such as - How did the Father, Christ, and the Holy Ghost become God?  Did they also have to go through their own mortal probation to attain Godhood?  Or did they have a different Plan of Happiness in their Progression?  Whatever the answer is - I believe they got married in this phase of their progression.

And about the Holy Ghost not having a body.  I don't believe that he does not have one.  I believe that He chose (as the Father chooses - they are One) to not be in that form in the same manner that Christ chose not to be in His spirit body to gain a mortal one.  In the Transfiguration, He chose to be in His spirit body to talk to God, so it is not that He doesn't have one before He was born of Mary either... unless you believe God gave Him one at the Transfiguration event, or that the Transfiguration event was not His spirit body.

And yes... once again... this is speculation.  Just because it doesn't match yours doesn't mean it's stupid.  Stop being a jerk about it.

Okay, anatess. Whatever. I'm out.

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Okay, anatess. Whatever. I'm out.

Can't handle a discussion?  An exchange of ideas?  I know you better than that.

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Okay, anatess. Whatever. I'm out.

Can't handle a discussion?  An exchange of ideas?  I know you better than that.

[anatess2]

duplidate.

 

Edited June 10, 2016 by anatess2

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

What do you think of the scripture that says "Though he was the Son yet learned he obedience by the things that he suffered?

 

The Traveler 

Hebrews 5:8

Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

Exegesis In a sentence:  "There's no limit to learning."

To me, this scripture supports the teaching that God continually progresses and continually exercises Free Agency.  The Godhead can be perfect, the Godhead can have perfect knowledge, the Godhead can have perfect Will, the Godhead an have perfect Obedience.  But they choose to be all this in every single moment of every single grain of time in very single spark of eternity.

Jesus becoming mortal was not exempt from the veil.  He himself had no recollection of his existence prior to mortality.  But his Spirit is already perfected.  He is already God.  That means - that He has already progressed to the point that His Spirit already chooses that which is The Father's.  At one point in His atoning sacrifice He was COMPLETELY without the Father's presence.  He went through Spiritual Death.  He asked the Father if there was another way.  He had to learn to trust and obey the Father completely.  A God separated from the Father.  This is beyond any kind of smidgen of my comprehension on what kind of pain this is.

Edited June 10, 2016 by anatess2

[Traveler]

14 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Can't handle a discussion?  An exchange of ideas?  I know you better than that.

I will ask a question if you are up to it. What is it about marriage and mortality that has you convinced that G-d can't handle it but we flawed people can?

 

 The Traveler 

[Traveler]

14 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Can't handle a discussion?  An exchange of ideas?  I know you better than that.

I will ask a question if you are up to it. What is it about marriage and mortality that has you convinced that G-d can't handle it but we flawed people can?

 

 The Traveler 

[anatess2]

2 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I will ask a question if you are up to it. What is it about marriage and mortality that has you convinced that G-d can't handle it but we flawed people can?

 

 The Traveler 

I don't understand the question.  What is the premise?  I don't believe there is anything we can handle that God can't.  So I'm not sure what your premise is.

[anatess2]

duplicate.

sigh.

Edited June 10, 2016 by anatess2

[Guest MormonGator]

30 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Can't handle a discussion?  An exchange of ideas?  I know you better than that.

Actually Anatess maybe he just doesn't feel like dealing. 

[anatess2]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

Actually Anatess maybe he just doesn't feel like dealing. 

Maybe he doesn't.  But we've been through a lot worse and came out good on the other side.  Lots of history between me and TFP.