I am following a discussion on David Bokovoy’s wall with some interest. Here he makes an argument, based on Gal 3:27-29, that since slavery will not exist in the Kingdom neither will gender distinctions:
Moving out of the first century, I want to point out that the idea that slavery no longer exists in the Kingdom is somewhat more complicated in LDS thought than in Paul’s presentation. In Section 132 the condition of those who do not marry according to the covenant is described in this fashion:
There is a lot more to it than simply an issue of equality…. Like Jesus, Paul was a first century apocalyptic Jew. For Paul, the Kingdom would change everything. He’s not saying that Jews and Gentiles would be equal. He’s saying that the distinction would not exist. All will be “one in Christ.” Paul isn’t saying that in the kingdom slaves and free people would be equal. He’s saying slavery will not exist. And neither will gender distinctions.
Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world. Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.
No matter how softly it’s depicted, that’s not an attractive idea.