The temple sealing does not guarantee a future

[Guest]

My Stake President said agency will always exist and no one who has been sealed to a spouse will be held hostage to that sealing for eternity if they don't want it. He told a story of his parents where his dad asked his mom if he called her name in the resurrection would she come to him and she told him no.

[Jane_Doe]

And?  This is elementary: God will NOT force a man to Heaven. 

Edited January 22, 2017 by Jane_Doe

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Jane_Doe said:

And?  This is elementary: God will force to man to Heaven. 

It means a sealing isn't really a sealing but a possibility.

[Jane_Doe]

18 minutes ago, Zarahemla said:

It means a sealing isn't really a sealing but a possibility.

Did you think God would force someone to be sealed to someone they don't want to or is not worthy of it?

We stress that the dead being baptized/endowed/sealed have a choice to accept their ordinances, but so do the living, every step of the way.

Edited January 22, 2017 by Jane_Doe

[bytebear]

The sealing is a covenant between three people.  Husband, Wife and God.  Either the husband or the wife pr both can break their covenant.  God, of course will not.

Edited January 22, 2017 by bytebear

[Maureen]

3 hours ago, Zarahemla said:

My Stake President said agency will always exist and no one who has been sealed to a spouse will be held hostage to that sealing for eternity if they don't want it. He told a story of his parents where his dad asked his mom if he called her name in the resurrection would she come to him and she told him no.

Quote

Jane_Doe said: And?  This is elementary: God will force to man to Heaven. 

@Jane_Doe, so you agree with @Zarahemla? Your post gives the impression that you have a problem with his thread comments. BTW, sometimes certain typos should be corrected.

M.

[askandanswer]

The sealing is more an opportunity than a guarantee. 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Zarahemla said:

My Stake President said agency will always exist and no one who has been sealed to a spouse will be held hostage to that sealing for eternity if they don't want it. He told a story of his parents where his dad asked his mom if he called her name in the resurrection would she come to him and she told him no.

I am going to extend my comments regarding getting to the Celestial Kingdom to being sealed - once you get sealed, it is actually fairly easy to stay on the path towards staying sealed for eternity.  You simply have to 1) repent of your sins (particularly the major ones that will keep you from going to the Celestial Kingdom); 2) stay with the program; and 3) always be trying to improve in some way spiritually, even just a little at a time (or, as President Hinckley used to say, "Stand up a little taller").  Your temple recommend interview should give you a real good idea as to where you stand with the Lord.  Sure, it requires effort, but there is nothing mysterious about going to the Celestial Kingdom and it is a very achievable goal if you are willing to put any effort in at all.   

I don't know your stake president, but I am willing to bet there is some kind of lurid backstory regarding the stake president's parents, and that this is not a normal situation involving your average faithful sealed LDS couple... 

Edited January 22, 2017 by DoctorLemon

[zil]

7 hours ago, Maureen said:

@Jane_Doe, so you agree with @Zarahemla? Your post gives the impression that you have a problem with his thread comments.

FWIW, I didn't get that impression.  My impression was that Jane was saying basically what I was thinking: "Yeah, so?"  It other words, this is not something new (to most members, at least), nor of concern.  If Zarahemla was looking for further comment or discussion, we'd need more from him, because there didn't seem to be anything to discuss.

Edited January 22, 2017 by zil

[estradling75]

8 hours ago, Zarahemla said:

It means a sealing isn't really a sealing but a possibility.

This is clearly documented in the scripture.  While some members might think that the ordinance performed in the temple was a guarantee right from that moment.  Most understand that all blessing from the Lord are condition upon our faithfulness.  That includes the blessing of the Sealing ordinances (which requires two to be faithful).  Someone deciding to opt out is someone deciding to not be faithful to the ordinance.  (The person might have entirely valid reason for it, the Lord might even approve of such action, but it is them that breaks it)

Of course this means that the one who didn't opt out is also affected...  Such is the nature of mortality.  Which is why God promised that he will judge righteously and true and that the things we had no control over are not held against us and that he will not deny the righteous any blessing in the eternities.  Even though we might not have it here.

[Jane_Doe]

11 hours ago, Maureen said:

@Jane_Doe, so you agree with @Zarahemla? Your post gives the impression that you have a problem with his thread comments. BTW, sometimes certain typos should be corrected.

M.

Gah- typo's are the bane of my existence.

God will NOT force a men to Heaven, but rather every soul is free.  This is a commonly sung hymn https://www.lds.org/music/library/hymns/know-this-that-every-soul-is-free?lang=eng.  @zil got my impression right: 

3 hours ago, zil said:

FWIW, I didn't get that impression.  My impression was that Jane was saying basically what I was thinking: "Yeah, so?"  It other words, this is not something new (to most members, at least), nor of concern.  If Zarahemla was looking for further comment or discussion, we'd need more from him, because there didn't seem to be anything to discuss.

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Jane_Doe said:

Gah- typo's are the bane of my existence.

God will NOT force a men to Heaven, but rather every soul is free.  This is a commonly sung hymn https://www.lds.org/music/library/hymns/know-this-that-every-soul-is-free?lang=eng.  @zil got my impression right: 

 

Don't always assume that everyone is as smart and informed as you.

[Guest MormonGator]

18 minutes ago, Zarahemla said:

Don't always assume that everyone is as smart and informed as you.

On the other side of the coin, it's a good idea to remember that you (no, not you in particular. Universal usage of the word "you") are not as smart as you think you are either. 

Edited January 22, 2017 by MormonGator

[zil]

1 hour ago, Zarahemla said:

Don't always assume that everyone is as smart and informed as you.

Sorry, @Zarahemla, I meant no offense and I'm sure @Jane_Doe didn't either.  You're right, we shouldn't assume, we should have asked.  Sorry.

(Note: Whether this was new to you has nothing to do with "smart" - from your posts, you're smart.  It was just old news to us and we made an erroneous assumption, but I never once assumed you weren't smart, so please don't think that.)

[Anddenex]

On 1/21/2017 at 9:37 PM, Zarahemla said:

It means a sealing isn't really a sealing but a possibility.

Although I understand what you are presenting the statement is not correct. A sealing is a sealing, and as with all other covenants and saving ordinances they are based upon our faithfulness. It would be similar to saying, "A baptism isn't really a baptism" because it isn't guaranteed you will make it to heaven although we have been baptized. 

A sealing implies two elements:

1) Worthiness (clean hands and a pure heart) 

2) Agency of partner (God will not force a woman or a man to be with someone, more so upon the priesthood holder) 

All covenants are opportunities for us to obtain eternal life, exaltation through Christ. 

[Just_A_Guy]

"Seal" has two meanings.  Colloquially, it refers to the sealing ritual.  But in D&C 132, it *also* refers to a ratifying "seal" that the Holy Spirit of Promise places over the ritual; and that seal is conditional on the parties' faithfulness.  D&C 132:18 contemplates, inter alia, a scenario where the ritual is done properly according to Church procedure but the Holy Spirit's "seal" is not given due to one or both parties' unwillingness to be bound by the convenants pertaining to the New and Everlasting Covenant of marriage.

Edited January 24, 2017 by Just_A_Guy