- Stephen Fleming on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “Here’s a few more quotes from JS that I think stress the point that he hoped that have his friends as part of his eternal “nucleus of heaven” in the next life. April 16, 1843: “More painful to me the thought of anhilitation than death, if I had no expectation of seeing my mother Brother & Sisters & friends again my heart would burst in a moment & I should go down to my grave. The expectation of seeing my friends in the morning of the resurrection cheers my soul, and make be bear up against the evils of life, it is like their taking a long journey. & on their return we meet them with increased joy.” July 23, 1843, Choppy notes from Willard Richards: ““frie[n]dship is the grand fundamental prin[c]iple of Mormonism. to revolutin [revolutionize?] civilize the world.— pour forth love. fr[i]e[n]dship like Bro Tulys Blacksmith shop.” The later editors expanded that final phrase to say: ““Friendship is like brother Turley in his blacksmith shop welding iron to iron.” JS spoke of baptism for the dead forming a “welding link” in DC 128:18 and seemed to want “welding” to bind friends as well. In an April 15, 1842 conference, JS spoke of a dispute between John E. Page and Orson Hyde saying, “we will fellowship Elder Page until Elder Hyde comes, and we will then weld them together and make them one.”” Nov 21, 13:20
- on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “All good points, RLD, and I think they indicate a number of clashing forces in our doctrine of eternal marriage. Again, Plato taught eternal marriage and I’d argue that eternal marriage inherently brings up the question of non-monogamy since there are so many cases of spousal death, divorce, etc. That’s what the Sadducees wanted to address: what if a woman had 7 husbands? Who would she be married to in the next life? I have heard lots of talk in the church and on the Bloggernacle of there being plenty of unwed souls (lots of infant deaths) to fill in the gaps. That makes sense, but I’d also point about that Joseph Smith did see interlocking marriages as a way to bind loved ones together. Again, I’ve argued for a long time that JS’s original plan was shared marriage (men AND women being able to have multiple spouses) but that JS switched to polygyny in 1843 when he got pushback from his close followers (especially Hyrum). DC 132 was about the switch and verse 41 refers to the old system where women could have multiple husbands. Another issue for JS was the belief in wanting to make his close connections in this life eternal beyond the nuclear family. Here’s a couple of quotes I think are useful from other people since we don’t have a ton from JS himself (pretty secretive about all this). This first one is from John Bennett, a scoundrel, yes, but a close adviser for some time who did leak some correct information. I think Bennett was in the ballpark with this quote: “It has been revealed to him [JS] that there will be no harmony in heaven unless the Saints select their companions and marry IN TIME, FOR ETERNITY!!! They must marry in time so as to begin to form the sincere attachment and unsophisticated affection which is so necessary to consummate in eternity in order to the peace of Heaven.” “Letter from Gen. Bennett,” Hawk Eye (Burlington, Iowa) December 7, 1843. There was an “on-earth” aspect to what JS was trying to achieve. This next one is a very late quote from Benjamin F. Johnson, but strikes me as conveying similar ideas: “The Prophet taught us that Dominion & powr in the great future, would be Comensurate with the no [number] of ‘Wives Childin & Friends’ that we inheret here and that our great mission to earth was to Organize a Neculi [nucleus] of Heaven to take with us.” I do think JS had aspirations of a utopian society. Plato’s REPUBLIC had both shared goods and marriages. It seems to me JS’s goal was to form that utopia and have it be eternal. Hard to pull off, but who knows what God has in store?” Nov 21, 12:52
- on 1860 Utah Had Fewer Skilled and Educated Workers than Almost Any Other State/Territory in the US: “Hmm…I’m no economic historian, but I’d expect mean SEI in 1860 to be highest on the east coast, then gradually decrease as you go west with maybe a bit of a bump right on the west coast. Going north to south, my guess is the more industrialized north would be higher than the more agricultural south, but I’m less confident of that. Significantly higher in the south seems unlikely. I’d also expect neighboring states to be fairly similar–big shifts are more likely the result of differences in measurement than reality. Well, we don’t see that. I’m especially dubious that the region with the lowest mean SEI was the Great Lakes states. On the frontier, I’ll bet there was a lot of undercounting, and it seems plausible that people with higher SEI were more likely to be counted as they were more settled and more likely to be known to the government. (Maybe the reason Utah is so low is that the Church’s networking made the count more complete and thus more accurate.) In the south, I doubt slave occupations were recorded consistently. So I’m kind of dubious about this data anywhere west of the Mississippi or south of the Mason-Dixon line, which is where you get most of the big differences between neighboring states. But Kerry William Bate is right about working with the data we have. “if you think you’re a heretic because of your political opinions at church, try being a sociology PhD who doesn’t care about inequality research” Haha, I’ll bet! Just in case any other prospective social scientists are reading though, it seems to me that the evils of economic inequality are a leitmotif of the whole Restoration project. The Nephites may have fallen due to the inward sin of pride, but the outward manifestation of it was inequality. Then there’s the City of Enoch, the United Order, etc. I hope a generation of Latter-day Saint social scientists who remember President Benson’s call to study the Book of Mormon (which has been repeated by subsequent prophets) but forget his politics (which have not) will bring that perspective to the study of inequality. Not that everyone needs to.” Nov 21, 12:23
- on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “The question is what will make us happiest, and I don’t know the answer. I hate the idea of forcing people to choose between partners who made them happy. But avoiding it doesn’t lead to polygyny, but to some sort of group marriage. So will that make us the happiest? The empirical evidence from our history suggests probably not. (And if Joseph Smith got the idea from the Old Testament, he knew that going in.) Yes, we’ll be very different people by then. Yes, there will be no constraints on the amount of time and attention we can give to each partner. I’m still dubious. One thing I’m sure of is that no one will have to “settle.” Worlds without number implies people without number. Look at a few pictures of galaxies and ponder how big they are. Then look at something like the Hubble Deep Field images. There’s a partner for everyone out there who will make them very happy, without having to resort to unwanted polygamy. @Jack: Yes, in the celestial kingdom eros will at long last be subordinate to agape. But I for one will be very disappointed if eros disappears completely. (And C.S. Lewis can call me greedy, but I want chocolate in heaven too.)” Nov 21, 11:01
- on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “LHL, I think we’re all in agreement here that a “loving God” won’t “force his beautiful daughters into such a doctrine,” but this post asked the question about what happens in the next life when perfect monogamy is disrupted: death, divorce, singleness, unhappy marriages etc.” Nov 21, 10:25
- on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “What ever the afterlife brings, I (in no way) believe that it will include God sanctioned polygamy. I’ve come to believe that polygamy was (and is) an abomination; and an entirely man-made practice. It is already being remembered in infamy and as a great stain on the history of the Church. One of my favorite LDS Hymns is “Oh My Father”, and one of my favorite lines within the song is “the thought makes reason stare”. To even attempt to believe that the loving God of all, would force his beautiful daughters into such a doctrine, truly “the thought makes reason stare”; and I for one – believe it is one horrendous stain on human kind.” Nov 21, 07:36
- on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “Head, yes, I hope we all believe that couples aren’t forced into eternal relationships by our earthly sealings. And I do like to think that as we strive to be the kinds of people that have the qualities of the Celestial Kingdom, we’ll become less possessive in our love.” Nov 21, 06:46
- on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “Ann and Alan start dating at 16 all within LDS standards. At high school graduation, Alan stays in home town to work and get ready for mission. Ann heads off to college. Their relationship slowly dissapates and eventually they decide to break things off right before Alan is leaving for mission at 19. Ann meets RM within a year, gets sealed. Alan gets home after mission, meets girl and is sealed. Fast forward about 30 years to their 30 year high school reunion. Ann and Alan attend, are both still married. Five minutes of reminescing and life goes back to normal. Alternatively, one of them is widowed. Again, five minutes of reminescing and life goes back to normal. Hallmark Movie Plot alternative: Both are widowed, the old flames of romance are fanned, and within 6 months they remarry each other. They spend the next 40 years happily married, visit their children and grandchildren, go on several senior missions, etc. In their old age they ask their children to seal them by proxy, which is done after both die within 6 months of one another around age 90. Per our doctrine, they have to “accept” the proxy sealing performed on their behalf. I can’t think of any reason why they wouldn’t. So, first marriages of around 30 and 28 years each, followed by second marriage of 40 years to one another. God’s standard is not monogamy — its serial monogamy in mortality followed by possible plurality in perpetuity. (But see that “choices and desires allowed” language from the handbook.) I think we’ll either be very monogamous in the next life or very plural in the next life. Either way we’ll be perfect, we’ll be happy, and we’ll be perfectly happy with how things shake out. But I think, based on all the teachings of church leaders, those relationships will be romantic. Otherwise, we’re no better than other religions that relegate relationships in the afterlife to non-spousal and non-familial love. We’re not sealed to “friends.” We’re to become “one flesh” with our spouse. What happens when we become “one flesh” with more than one is a mystery to me.” Nov 21, 06:03
- on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “Thanks for the comments! I agree with Neal and Lily that love in the next life is about more than just biological family. I’ve often felt that our church rhetoric is that biological family is what is “eternal” and that other relationships are not. That’s not what Joseph Smith taught.” Nov 21, 05:42
- on 1860 Utah Had Fewer Skilled and Educated Workers than Almost Any Other State/Territory in the US: “Kerry William Bate: Thank you! el oso: Interesting; yes, I assume a lot of early Utahns were actually skilled and educated, but in the 1860s everybody is just starting to have enough calories to not be constantly thinking about food (and farming) all the time.” Nov 20, 19:19
