Temple thoughts the Sealing Ordinance

[JohnsonJones]

Quote

18 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife, and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity, if that ^acovenant is not by me or by my word, which is my law, and is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, through him whom I have anointed and appointed unto this power, then it is not valid neither of force when they are out of the world, because they are not joined by me, saith the Lord, neither by my word; when they are out of the world it cannot be received there, because the angels and the gods are appointed there, by whom they cannot pass; they cannot, therefore, inherit my glory; for my house is a house of order, saith the Lord God.

19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man ^amarry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the ^bnew and everlasting covenant, and it is ^csealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of ^dpromise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the ^ekeys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit ^fthrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s ^gBook of Life, that he shall commit no ^hmurder whereby to shed innocent ⁱblood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their ^jexaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the ^kseeds forever and ever.

20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from ^aeverlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be ^bgods, because they have ^call power, and the angels are subject unto them.

The above is from Section 132.  I was deep in thought upon these things this week while attending the temple and had the following thoughts.  I would remark, THESE ARE JUST my thoughts on the matter and a few of my opinions.  They are in NO WAY to be confused with the doctrines of the Church nor construed as being stated as doctrine.  They are MERELY what thoughts occurred to me and my postulations thereof.

On this, there has been in the past, questions and remarks regarding other ordinances beyond the Sealing Ordinances of the Temple.  I am not going into detail on it (if that is what people thought I was about to do, I am sorry but that is not what this post is about).  I am going to perhaps discuss it more indirectly in a way in relation to the Temple in general (but, I also will not be talking about those ordinances directly, or at least, explicitly in detail regarding them either).

There has been some consternation about other ordinances that people postulate about.  It occurred to me this week that this was for naught.  There is no reason for people to be concerned about it or whether they or others receive it in this lifetime.

The reason, is because of what is referred to in the verse above.  The verse above, as far as I can tell, is DIRECTLY referring to Temple Sealings, specifically Temple Marriage/Sealing between a Husband and a Wife.

Specifically verse 19 where it states

Quote

it is ^csealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of ^dpromise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the ^ekeys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit ^fthrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s ^gBook of Life, that he shall commit no ^hmurder whereby to shed innocent ⁱblood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their ^jexaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the ^kseeds forever and ever.

This then would be covered in the Sealing Covenant, at least as we read it from the Doctrine and Covenants (or that is my interpretation of section 132 and what it is talking about). 

As with ANY ordinance, it needs to be sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise (and this would ALSO apply to any ordinance that we recieve).  If it is, then, as the verse says above, we have our sealing and our promise right there. 

Beyond the ordinance spoken of in verse 132, which appears to be the Sealing ordinance of Marriage, there is NO NEED for one to fret or to covet beyond this.  IF they fulfill the crowing Ordinance spoken of in the verse above (which I assume is the Sealing ordinance of Marriage as that is what I feel section 132 pertains to in this portion), they have already received blessings sealed upon them with the promises of such things according the Doctrine and Covenants (Verses quoted above). 

Of course, it is all pertaining to it being Sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise which is also (as one could put it) reliant upon their faithfulness. 

As I said, just my thoughts that occurred to me and I thought I'd write them down.  They may be of no use to anyone.  I think though, that the verses above are of interest in what they promise in regards to the what I feel section 132 is discussing (the Sealing Ordinance, specifically that of a Temple Marriage/Sealing). 

I may be wrong, of course, just my thoughts on the the matter in relation to the verses above.

Edited November 9, 2023 by JohnsonJones
Trying to stick with the scriptures and be scripturally accurate.

[mikbone]

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

and if ye abide in my covenant

132:7 the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations.

 

Pretty hefty if then clause.

1  If they fulfill all obligations after having been

2  sealed by the holy spirit of promise

3  And don’t commit murder

 

Points two and three must be fulfilled prior to the final judgement.

In my opinion, point one requires commitment to the glory of God, diligence, and work both now and after the final judgement.

 

This scripture always invokes a recollection of King David and Uriah (as well as Uriah’s men).

 

Best not to commit murder.

[Just_A_Guy]

I agree with you in substance, @JohnsonJones, though I might quibble a smidge with the way you get there (I think 132:19–and verse 26–are each subtly referring to a different ordinance that makes an unconditional promise of exaltation).

I’ve been reading Buerger’s “The Mysteries of Godliness” (definitely not for everyone; and though he has some interesting insights I think he largely missed the point of temple work generally and the endowment in particular); and he provided a quote from President Snow affirming that (this is me paraphrasing) exaltation could be gained without receiving what was then called the Second Anointing during one’s lifetime.  (Buerger also suggests that in Joseph Smith’s day, having received this ordinance—also called receiving the “fullness of the priesthood”—was what separated the apostles from the other pretenders to Joseph’s mantle; and that Sidney Rigdon’s excommunication technically came because he hadn’t received the Second Anointing, but knew it existed, and so administered a version of it to himself in order to bolster his leadership claims.)

Edited November 9, 2023 by Just_A_Guy

[mikbone]

12 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Sidney Rigdon’s excommunication technically came because he hadn’t received the Second Anointing, but knew it existed, and so administered a version of it to himself in order to bolster his leadership claims.

This displays Sidney Rigdon’s complete lack of understanding of the gospel.

The priesthood only allows one the authority to provide service and bless others.  

 

Although Mosiah 18:14 is a curiosity.  

It is truly an interesting event.  In 13 it is obvious that Alma only uses Helam’s name and does not specifically site his own name.

Alma obviously had been given the priesthood previously.  Which means that he had likely been baptized previously.  Perhaps he felt the need to re-commit himself.

And Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery received the priesthood prior to being baptized.  

 

[laronius]

On the Church's website this is what it says:

"In the Church, an ordinance is a sacred, formal act or ceremony performed by the authority of the priesthood. Some ordinances are essential to our exaltation. They include baptism, confirmation, ordination to the Melchizedek Priesthood (for men), the temple endowment, and the marriage sealing. With each of these ordinances, we enter into solemn covenants with the Lord. Other ordinances, such as naming and blessing children, consecrating oil, and administering to the sick and afflicted, are also performed by priesthood authority. While they are not essential to our salvation, they are important for our comfort, guidance, and encouragement."

The definition of ordinance as "a sacred, formal act or ceremony performed by the authority of the priesthood" is general enough to take in a lot of stuff (for lack of a better word). If the Lord were to appear to someone and pronounce their calling and election is made sure I could see how that could be termed an ordinance, in and of itself. But I think it falls under the not-exaltation-essential category, at least in this life. And if it's not an essential ordinance in this life it must be, in my opinion, separate from the fulfillment of the sealing ordinance which is an essential ordinance. Either way I agree with the OP's main point, as I read it, that it's not something a person needs to fret over.