NOM

I used to think the sealing ordinance was so beautiful. How blessed we were to be members of a church that had the wondrous power to seal our family together forever! I've thought a lot about that since my disaffection. What about this sealing power; was it as fake as an angel with a drawn sword? What about my family?!

Then I thought: what kind of a-hole god would purposely separate a family that loves each other after death? I mean, my daughter is my daughter! The relationship I have with her; the love that I have for her and for my wife is real. It exists! Is god going to erase that love, those relationships for anyone who didn't do a magic handshake? That's just ridiculous to think god would be like that.

I was reading a biography of Brigham Young recently and it asserted that he used the temple ordinances to gain control of the church. Basically, something like: "Joseph gave me the signs and tokens you need to get to heaven, so if you want to go to heaven, you need to follow me to get them." What a villain. When I read about that it really hit me the amount of control the sealing ordinances give the church over its members.

The church created the problem and the solution. "After death, you'll never see your loved ones again! God is going to separate you and you'll be alone forever!" "Oh no, that's terrible, is the anything we can do?!?!" "Welllllll... as a matter of fact, there is. Give me 10% of your gross income and do everything I say, and I'll let you in on the super secret handshake and incantation you need to get around this. But for the incantation to work, you have to keep giving me 10% of your gross income and keep doing everything I say for the rest of your life, or the deal's off."

Or the other side of it, where members think they are "stuck" to an idiot ex-spouse because they are "still sealed" to them even though they are divorced. I used to home teach a lady who felt incredible angst because she was technically "still sealed" to her emotionally abusive ex. I could never convince her that she was not going to be with him in the eternities.

I've done a complete 180 on this doctrine. Any doctrines you all used to find compelling as TBMs that you now find repulsive?

I was going to say the sealing/eternal family doctrine, for sure. You did a good job stating my reasons. I'll just add that if I were talking to that lady, it's my understanding the man and woman stand before the Lord, together, and each is asked if they'll take each other. So, you can still say no up until that moment.

Both my ex and I'll be refusing each other.

Our being sealed had no hold before and it really has no hold, now.

The concept of eternal family is so limiting in scope kf eternal progress. It has such an earthly perspective to it. When you look at the eternities it makes no sense. If I am babysitting my kids or grandkids, when will I ever have time to master cosmology or spiritual creationism?

Culper Jr. wrote: ↑Sat May 27, 2017 6:47 pm...Then I thought: what kind of a-hole god would purposely separate a family that loves each other after death? I mean, my daughter is my daughter! The relationship I have with her; the love that I have for her and for my wife is real. It exists! Is god going to erase that love, those relationships for anyone who didn't do a magic handshake? That's just ridiculous to think god would be like that.

I was reading a biography of Brigham Young recently and it asserted that he used the temple ordinances to gain control of the church. Basically, something like: "Joseph gave me the signs and tokens you need to get to heaven, so if you want to go to heaven, you need to follow me to get them." What a villain. When I read about that it really hit me the amount of control the sealing ordinances give the church over its members.

The church created the problem and the solution. "After death, you'll never see your loved ones again! God is going to separate you and you'll be alone forever!" "Oh no, that's terrible, is the anything we can do?!?!" "Welllllll... as a matter of fact, there is. Give me 10% of your gross income and do everything I say, and I'll let you in on the super secret handshake and incantation you need to get around this...

I completely agree!
It's essentially priestcraft - they're selling celestial worthiness.
And also, I believe that relationships are what they are, independent of any religious rituals.
If you relate well with someone - you relate! If you don't, you don't! No handshake or paper can make reality what it isn't.
Even marriage certificates are more of a blueprint of intent than the actual relationship - and nobody owns anybody.

MalcolmVillager wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 11:15 am The concept of eternal family is so limiting in scope kf eternal progress. It has such an earthly perspective to it. When you look at the eternities it makes no sense. If I am babysitting my kids or grandkids, when will I ever have time to master cosmology or spiritual creationism?

Not to mention that they will have partners or spouses of their own who they will want to be with. It all is so sweet and cozy when you're sitting in church with your little ones, but they grow up and get married too.....do you think they will still want to live with their parents in the eternities? NO!

I've asked several active members what they believe the difference will be in their relationship with those they are sealed to vs. those they aren't sealed to (if they are all together in the Celestial Kingdom). None of them have been able to give me an answer.

MalcolmVillager wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 11:15 am The concept of eternal family is so limiting in scope kf eternal progress. It has such an earthly perspective to it. When you look at the eternities it makes no sense. If I am babysitting my kids or grandkids, when will I ever have time to master cosmology or spiritual creationism?

I'll be honest, I just looked forward to cracking planets in half and collapsing stars. I just figured that our minds would be augmented and we'd have... well, eternity. I didn't think about the fact that being ward mission leader probably wasn't going to teach me much about quantum entanglement and all the cool stuff being an eternal being was supposed to be about.

AllieOop wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 1:07 pm

MalcolmVillager wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 11:15 am The concept of eternal family is so limiting in scope kf eternal progress. It has such an earthly perspective to it. When you look at the eternities it makes no sense. If I am babysitting my kids or grandkids, when will I ever have time to master cosmology or spiritual creationism?

Not to mention that they will have partners or spouses of their own who they will want to be with. It all is so sweet and cozy when you're sitting in church with your little ones, but they grow up and get married too.....do you think they will still want to live with their parents in the eternities? NO!

I've asked several active members what they believe the difference will be in their relationship with those they are sealed to vs. those they aren't sealed to (if they are all together in the Celestial Kingdom). None of them have been able to give me an answer.

When you consider how Mormons are about 15 million and only 30% actually go to church - that's not even 1% of the world population. So according to this lds theory, about 99.3% of the world would be screwed when they get to heaven because they didn't get sealed in a Mormon temple. It's ridiculous, especially when you consider people of all faiths are having spiritual NDEs and other spiritual experiences that reveal continued connection with people who have passed on who they loved.

It would be so much better time invested if people would work on self awareness and how to relate better rather pursuing genealogy for temple work. Even Jesus said, "God is God of the living not of the dead." But relating with dead people is so much easier!

Newme wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 12:57 pm Even marriage certificates are more of a blueprint of intent than the actual relationship - and nobody owns anybody.

Great point; well stated! I've often thought about whether we serve the ordinance, or the ordinance serves us. I feel the ordinance should serve us by helping us to understand what is possible in a relationship (like as you said a blueprint), and to help us build a relationship now. Many people I know in the church seem to think that slavishly serving the ordinance (through prescribed church obedience) now will somehow magically produce a relationship in the hereafter that is not present in this life.

Culper Jr. wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 7:10 pm

Newme wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 12:57 pm Even marriage certificates are more of a blueprint of intent than the actual relationship - and nobody owns anybody.

Great point; well stated! I've often thought about whether we serve the ordinance, or the ordinance serves us. I feel the ordinance should serve us by helping us to understand what is possible in a relationship (like as you said a blueprint), and to help us build a relationship now. Many people I know in the church seem to think that slavishly serving the ordinance (through prescribed church obedience) now will somehow magically produce a relationship in the hereafter that is not present in this life.

I swear to you this is why the women I know cry when I say things like this. See, I think marriage and a quality relationship actually matter. I'm not gritting my teeth and enduring hoping we'll both be magically transformed in the hereafter.

Newme wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 6:27 pm When you consider how Mormons are about 15 million and only 30% actually go to church - that's not even 1% of the world population. So according to this lds theory, about 99.3% of the world would be screwed when they get to heaven because they didn't get sealed in a Mormon temple. It's ridiculous, especially when you consider people of all faiths are having spiritual NDEs and other spiritual experiences that reveal continued connection with people who have passed on who they loved.

I don't disagree that it's an absurd concept, but the NDE can be scientifically explained as the pineal gland releasing DMT in large quantities in the moment of death. It's really just a natural phenomenon.

[/quote]
I don't disagree that it's an absurd concept, but the NDE can be scientifically explained as the pineal gland releasing DMT in large quantities in the moment of death. It's really just a natural phenomenon.
[/quote]

I read a book - Eben Alexander: Proof of Heaven, written by a neurosurgeon who seems convinced that brain physiology playing tricks, is not sufficient to explain all experiences of an afterlife.

Obviously he could have a hidden agenda, but I'm still very open to the idea that there is something more that can't be attributed to natural causes.

Give It Time wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 7:48 pm I'm not gritting my teeth and enduring hoping we'll both be magically transformed in the hereafter.

Yeah, ^^this totally. It also applies in the context of a relationship with one's children too. DW's father was a total church guy and had little to do with his kids. He never really had a relationship with her, but he could always be counted on to magnify some calling. Long story, but she's pretty bitter about it all and really wants nothing to do with him in the hereafter. Didn't even go to his funeral when he passed away. All that church service and obedience to be sealed to kids who want nothing to do with you.

Culper Jr. wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2017 1:30 pm

Give It Time wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 7:48 pm I'm not gritting my teeth and enduring hoping we'll both be magically transformed in the hereafter.

Yeah, ^^this totally. It also applies in the context of a relationship with one's children too. DW's father was a total church guy and had little to do with his kids. He never really had a relationship with her, but he could always be counted on to magnify some calling. Long story, but she's pretty bitter about it all and really wants nothing to do with him in the hereafter. Didn't even go to his funeral when he passed away. All that church service and obedience to be sealed to kids who want nothing to do with you.

This is sadly true? My children want nothing to do with their father. The reasons are entirely different, but they don't want to be sealed to him.

I confess, right now I'm kind of feeling sorry for my ex.

redjay wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2017 10:28 am Obviously he could have a hidden agenda, but I'm still very open to the idea that there is something more that can't be attributed to natural causes.

I'm open to it too. Even hopeful. But I don't think the NDE qualifies. I guess I want to be able to say that when/if I really ever do find it, my reasons for believing it are sound. That it really is the most valid option and that reality is telling me something. In a sense, to me that's a testimony.

The priesthood for me is repulsive now. The thought that we have special access to god, above what others have is a total dick move, and anathema to what I feel about god.
My family argues that the old testament was all about chosen people, authority, and access to god through ritual. And yeah, I just don't believe that anymore and it is repulsive.
What kind of a$$hole god sets things up so that you are screwed in life because you don't have the magic power?
I feel like alot of us here and a lot of my personal journey has involved retooling a belief that minimizes god being an a$$hole.

Emower wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2017 1:32 pmI feel like alot of us here and a lot of my personal journey has involved retooling a belief that minimizes god being an a$$hole.

This, exactly! I told DH at one point that since I imagined a god who was so much larger in scope and inclusive, I could no longer worship the one imagined by JS. I came to see the Mormon idea of god as incredibly parochial, partial, and a micro-manager to boot. I also came to think that people imagine god in their own image.

Culper Jr. wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 7:10 pm

Newme wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 12:57 pm Even marriage certificates are more of a blueprint of intent than the actual relationship - and nobody owns anybody.

Great point; well stated! I've often thought about whether we serve the ordinance, or the ordinance serves us. I feel the ordinance should serve us by helping us to understand what is possible in a relationship (like as you said a blueprint), and to help us build a relationship now. Many people I know in the church seem to think that slavishly serving the ordinance (through prescribed church obedience) now will somehow magically produce a relationship in the hereafter that is not present in this life.

Exactly.
It's like worshiping a symbol, mistaking it for what it represents.

Mad Jax wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 9:08 pm

Newme wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2017 6:27 pm When you consider how Mormons are about 15 million and only 30% actually go to church - that's not even 1% of the world population. So according to this lds theory, about 99.3% of the world would be screwed when they get to heaven because they didn't get sealed in a Mormon temple. It's ridiculous, especially when you consider people of all faiths are having spiritual NDEs and other spiritual experiences that reveal continued connection with people who have passed on who they loved.

I don't disagree that it's an absurd concept, but the NDE can be scientifically explained as the pineal gland releasing DMT in large quantities in the moment of death. It's really just a natural phenomenon.

Yes, no doubt if you hooked up a brain to an EEG, you'd notice some phenomena, but as Gottfried Leibniz explained, you still cannot explain the actual thoughts from the perspective of the person experiencing those thoughts. Science cannot explain certain things, as Redjay noted. That book he mentioned is about a guy who was even more skeptical than you, MadJax - and he was a neurosurgeon, so it's not like he didn't consider the anatomy and functionality of the brain.

A couple of things convince me of NDE's:
1) Distant, confirmed NDE witnessed events (they see things happen far away that they'd never know of unless they had an out-of-body experience), or similar (Ie accurately predicting the future).
2) Energy is in part, defined as consciousness. Energy doesn't zap of of existence but changes form.

That's my logical explanation. But as or more important, is the functional illusion of believing in more than meets the eye.
After having experienced what I have, I realize more the need for motivating beliefs - even if they're not factually proven.
Beliefs affect us very strongly whether they're grounded in reality or not - that's why the 1st variable the FDA tests for meds is placebo effect.
I figure, I might as well consciously choose beliefs that work for me rather than against me.

Also, when I consider how things work now - before anything materializes, it's first thought of, then motivation and action - the quantum mind theory may be plausible, which actually supports the Mormon idea of us as intelligences all working together to create this world.

BTW, interesting that you mentioned "natural phenomenon." I was just thinking about this yesterday, as I sat in my thoughtful spot in nature - wondering what aspects of human beings are natural and which aren't. And similarly, which aspects of a tree, a squirrel - or anything on this planet are natural and which aren't? What's the distinguishing criteria?

Emower wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2017 1:32 pm The priesthood for me is repulsive now. The thought that we have special access to god, above what others have is a total dick move, and anathema to what I feel about god.
My family argues that the old testament was all about chosen people, authority, and access to god through ritual. And yeah, I just don't believe that anymore and it is repulsive.
What kind of a$$hole god sets things up so that you are screwed in life because you don't have the magic power?
I feel like alot of us here and a lot of my personal journey has involved retooling a belief that minimizes god being an a$$hole.

Thanks for expressing my thoughts.

Newme wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2017 2:10 pm BTW, interesting that you mentioned "natural phenomenon." I was just thinking about this yesterday, as I sat in my thoughtful spot in nature - wondering what aspects of human beings are natural and which aren't. And similarly, which aspects of a tree, a squirrel - or anything on this planet are natural and which aren't? What's the distinguishing criteria?

Perhaps I should have said naturalistic phenomenon. That may have described my assessment more accurately. Meaning there's no element of spirit necessary for the NDE to exist.

But that said, I have heard some pretty amazing NDE stories and some are corroborated by witnesses and appear impossible without some kind of spiritual phenomenon (or other phenomenon beyond known science). But these appear to be outliers, in general. I may look into the book to which you are referring though. I am, after all, looking for the possibility of something outside of what i consider "naturalistic" phenomenon.