Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Re: Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

Post by _beastie »

I copied Ludd's comment and my reply here, because it was on topic.

Ludd wrote:

There was a guy in the stake I grew up in who was supposedly one of the most doctrinally knowledgeable people ever to walk the earth (Patriarch, Mission Pres, Stake Pres). I asked him about this men/women ratio problem in the CK. He said that all the males who died before 8 would be angels-only in the CK, but that the females would be resurrected with "a full set of equipment under the hood" in order to "bear the souls of men" (and women also, I presume). He said the only men who would procreate in the CK had to have been married in mortality and sealed to his wife and all that jazz. I don't remember if he said it was good enough to get the sealing via proxy after you were dead. I seem to remember it that you actually had to have been married and sealed while on the earth "by the Priesthood".




I think this justification is probably close to what Joseph Smith and BY would have declared, to tell the truth. In fact, I think they would have gone further. Since the real purpose of polygyny was to increase the offspring of the alpha males, they simply wouldn't care if there was a surplus of males in the CK or not. Nor would they have cared if their practice of polygyny left LDS males without mates, either, during their lifetimes. It was about the alpha males getting all the wives they wanted, and the less worthy males (ie, the ones with lesser callings in the church) could just remain mateless in this life or the next. They could be ministering angels. They just had to get out of the way of the alpha males.

Of course, I'm speculating, but I think it's a justified speculation, given BY's other comments. He said that a woman could leave her husband without a divorce if she preferred a man "higher in authority." He also said that men who weren't willing to practice polygyny in the next life would lose the one wife they had to other men who embraced polygyny. I understand that the modern LDS church no longer practices or teaches these things, but these type of statements are why I think BY, and, by extension given his behavior, Joseph Smith didn't really care if other men were left without wives due to their own hoarding of wives.

LDS men who seem to almost fantasize about having more than one wife in the CK need to realize that the cost of polygyny may be their one wife, given to an alpha male in the CK. If BY's vision of the next life is accurate, it's the alpha males who will get as many wives as they want, no matter the cost to others. LDS men will be victims of this practice as surely as LDS women will be. There's only one winner in this scenario: alpha males, or, In other words, men with the highest callings in the LDS church.

_________________
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_kamenraider
_Emeritus
Posts: 230
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 5:49 am

Re: Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

Post by _kamenraider »

Beastie, it sounds like you're saying that the Church teaches that infants or young children who die will go to the higest degree of the celestial kingdom. D&C 131 says that the new and everlasting covenant of marriage must be entered into in order to obtain the highest of the three degrees in celestial glory. If we believe that the infants or kids in question go to the highest degree, then we would have to assume that they will have their temple ordinances performed by proxy and be sealed to a spouse by proxy, however the Church only performs proxy sealings to parents for children who die before age 8 (see Handbook 1, chap. 3, section 7.5 [pg. 23]) and does not perform any proxy ordinances for stillborn children (ibid., chap. 3, section 7.4 [pg. 23]). I know that there are cases from Church history where people had their deceased children sealed in marriage by proxy, but that is not done today. I've also seen quotes from Church leaders such as Brigham Young saying that stillborn children might be given another chance to be reborn in mortality to the same parents. Do you have any specific references for the idea that infants and children who die before age 8 go to the highest degree of the celestial kingdom?
A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth.
--Albert Einstein
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

Post by _Darth J »

kamenraider wrote:Do you have any specific references for the idea that infants and children who die before age 8 go to the highest degree of the celestial kingdom?


Doctrine and Covenants Institute Student Manual: Section 137 - Vision of the Celestial Kingdom

Even though little children will be saved, does that mean they will have eternal life? Elder McConkie explained: “Eternal life is life in the highest heaven of the celestial world; it is exaltation; it is the name of the kind of life God lives. It consists of a continuation of the family unity in eternity. . . . children will be saved in the celestial kingdom. Salvation means eternal life; the two terms are synonymous; they mean exactly the same thing. Joseph Smith said, ‘Salvation consists in the glory, authority, majesty, power and dominion which Jehovah possesses and in nothing else.’ ( Lectures on Faith, pp. 63–67.) We have come to speak of this salvation as exaltation—which it is—but all of the scriptures in all of the standard works call it salvation. I know of only three passages in all our scriptures which use salvation to mean something other and less than exaltation.” (“Salvation of Little Children,” p. 5.)

President Joseph Fielding Smith added:

“The Lord will grant unto these children the privilege of all the sealing blessings which pertain to the exaltation.

“We were all mature spirits before we were born, and the bodies of little children will grow after the resurrection to the full stature of the spirit, and all the blessings will be theirs through their obedience, the same as if they had lived to maturity and received them on the earth.

“The Lord is just and will not deprive any person of a blessing, simply because he dies before that blessing can be received. It would be manifestly unfair to deprive a little child of the privilege of receiving all the blessings of exaltation in the world to come simply because it died in infancy. . . .

“Children who die in childhood will not be deprived of any blessing. When they grow, after the resurrection, to the full maturity of the spirit, they will be entitled to all the blessings which they would have been entitled to had they been privileged to tarry here and receive them.” ( Doctrines of Salvation, 2:54; see also Mosiah 15:25 .)
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

Post by _Darth J »

kamenraider wrote:Do you have any specific references for the idea that infants and children who die before age 8 go to the highest degree of the celestial kingdom?


“Chapter 15: The Salvation of Little Children,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph F. Smith, 128

With little children who are taken away in infancy and innocence before they have reached the years of accountability, and are not capable of committing sin, the gospel reveals to us the fact that they are redeemed, and Satan has no power over them. Neither has death any power over them. They are redeemed by the blood of Christ, and they are saved just as surely as death has come into the world through the fall of our first parents. …

… Our beloved friends who are now deprived of their little one, have great cause for joy and rejoicing, even in the midst of the deep sorrow that they feel at the loss of their little one for a time. They know he is all right; they have the assurance that their little one has passed away without sin. Such children are in the bosom of the Father. They will inherit their glory and their exaltation, and they will not be deprived of the blessings that belong to them; for, in the economy of heaven, and in the wisdom of the Father, who doeth all things well, those who are cut down as little children are without any responsibility for their taking off, they, themselves, not having the intelligence and wisdom to take care of themselves and to understand the laws of life; and, in the wisdom and mercy and economy of God our Heavenly Father, all that could have been obtained and enjoyed by them if they had been permitted to live in the flesh will be provided for them hereafter. They will lose nothing by being taken away from us in this way. …
_kamenraider
_Emeritus
Posts: 230
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 5:49 am

Re: Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

Post by _kamenraider »

Thanks Darth J. If anyone has additional quotes, I'd be interested in seeing them.

It seems like Church leaders are quite willing to make comforting promises like that to parents, but I wonder why they don't provide the ordinances necessary for the promises to be realized. Maybe they're afraid that if they let sealings occur between people who were not married in mortality that some kooky members would perpetrate excesses like having deceased celebrity women sealed to them. (Now that I mention that, I seem to recall that a number of deceased famous women were sealed to Joseph Smith by proxy.)
A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth.
--Albert Einstein
_kamenraider
_Emeritus
Posts: 230
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 5:49 am

Re: Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

Post by _kamenraider »

Here's the quote from Brigham Young about stillborn children being reborn. It's from Wilford Woodruff's Journal, October 16, 1857:

"President Young said when some people have little children born at six and seven months from from pregnancy and they live a few hours then die, they bless them, name them, &c, but I don't do it for I think that such a spirit has not a fair chance, for I think that such a spirit will have a chance of occupying another tabernacle and develop itself."
A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth.
--Albert Einstein
_Yoda

Re: Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

Post by _Yoda »

kamenraider wrote:Here's the quote from Brigham Young about stillborn children being reborn. It's from Wilford Woodruff's Journal, October 16, 1857:

"President Young said when some people have little children born at six and seven months from from pregnancy and they live a few hours then die, they bless them, name them, &c, but I don't do it for I think that such a spirit has not a fair chance, for I think that such a spirit will have a chance of occupying another tabernacle and develop itself."

This, however, is clearly Brigham Young's opinion and not official doctrine.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Re: Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

Post by _beastie »

I guess kevinsim isn't interested in exploring this idea. I'm shocked, I tell you, just shocked.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_KevinSim
_Emeritus
Posts: 2962
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:31 am

Re: Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

Post by _KevinSim »

beastie wrote:This site gives the estimated number of births since 1 A.D. at 105,318,577,900. 8% of that is 8,425,486,232.

Beastie, where does this "8%" figure come from?

beastie wrote:Again, using approximately the 1.3 ratio, that means that approximately 56% of those deaths were male to 44% female. 56% of 105,318,577,900 is 471,827,229.

Is this a typo? 56% of 105,318,577,900 is clearly not 471,827,229. It actually looks like you mean 56% of the 8%, but even that would have you off by an order of magnitude. Did you mean to say that the current rate of death before the age of eight is 0.8%? Then at least your resulting figures would be right. And an 8% mortality rate does sound a little high. That's about one out of every twelve births resulting in a child who won't live past eight. I'm not sure I believe so many don't live that long.

beastie wrote:44% is 370,721,394. The difference between those two numbers is 101,105,835 excess males in the CK.

Even if you are off by an order of magnitude, that still makes only a difference between women and men in the Celestial Kingdom of one billion; that's still significantly less than the two to four billion figure Spektical gave on the other thread. But if you click at a number of the places on the chart it becomes pretty obvious that the overall average is much less than 8%, so Spektical appears to have been off even more.

beastie wrote:I think there is no way LDS men can even begin to understand what is being asked of LDS females unless they open their minds to the possibility of the same thing being asked of them.

That much is true, and I agree with you 100%.

beastie wrote:(edit on: Another reason this is a very conservative estimate is that the infant mortality rate would have been much higher in antiquity, as the numbers of births on the linked chart show.

Beastie, I couldn't find the mentioned linked chart. I guess the question I would ask you is, do you have any way of knowing that the ratio of boys dying before the age of eight and girls dying before, is anywhere near 1.3 in antiquity? If not, doesn't that throw the 101,105,835 figure into doubt? Isn't it possible that that figure could be much less than that, due perhaps to the ratio reducing to 1.1 before 1300 CE, perhaps?

Another significant question is, is the mortality rate likely to stay at 0.8% in the decades and/or centuries before us, or are medical discoveries going to reduce it substantially? Also, is the 1.3 ratio guaranteed to not fluctuate in the same period of time, getting perhaps closer to unity or even dropping to 0.9? I know Latter-day Saints tend to emphasize that the Second Coming, ending the whole game, is just around the corner, but I think I tend to agree with my little sister who points out that we've been hearing that all our lives, and it hasn't happened yet. Jesus may come back to Earth tomorrow, for all I know, but He also may come back in 10,000 years, or 100,000 years, for that matter.

Furthermore, the boys who die before they turn eight aren't the only ones that will make it to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom. Sociologist Rodney Stark made his famous prediction back in the 1980s that the LDS Church would grow to 200 million members by the 2080s. If he's right, and it does grow to that size, and keep growing, and if the current trend of two active male members for every three active female members continues, the disparity between the genders caused by that phenomenon could very easily dwarf the disparity (the other way) that you have observed in the not too distant future.

The way I look at it, it's a toss-up; it could go either way. I don't think it's a certain thing that there will be more males in the Celestial Kingdom than females.
Last edited by Guest on Sun Jul 15, 2012 2:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
KevinSim

Reverence the eternal.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Re: Why Men Will Have to Share Their Wives in the CK

Post by _beastie »

You're right, it was a typo and I did mean 8%, not .8%. And yes, those percentages were for the 8%, not the total number. I was in a rush as I was typing it up.

The 8% is a generous average, again used to provide a cushion for the China effect. The infant morality rate in third world countries today is far worse than 8%, but better in industrialized countries. However, in antiquity, the infant mortality rate was much higher than today. There is no reason to suspect that the ratio of male to female infant death would change as the numbers increase or decrease.

Look at this chart here (I tried to copy it but the format is messed up and I am rushed again)

http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/other_books/Ch.1_2001.pdf

Just one example: Rome, between 33 AD and 258 AD, the number of infant deaths per thousand was 329. It sounds like you're hoping the infant mortality rates in antiquity would be better than today, unless I've misunderstood you in my current state of fatigue. If I'm correct, and that's what you're hoping, it's just fanciful - as fanciful as hoping that Stark's projects will be correct. Church growth has been slowing, not accelerating.

I'm sorry to rush on this, particularly after prodding you to answer, but it is late for me right now and I risk making further typos and goofs if I continue. I'll try to come back tomorrow.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
Post Reply