Jump to content

Maidservant

Members
  • Posts

    1,943
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Maidservant

  1. Thank you, my dear. Yes, I make it round here occasionally :). Good to see you.
  2. That woman is my mother and myself. It's not someone other than myself. It's not about the assessment of that woman. It's that there is betrayal in it according to my experience and my current assessment of my own experience and of my mothers'. P.S. I doubt my mother would agree with my assessment, being much more traditionally faithful. But I hate seeing how she has ended up after giving her faith. Although she is a naturally positive person, so again, I don't think she would agree with how I see her circumstance. And she really did want to be a stay at home mom. For that matter, so did the girl I used to be. Because as near as I can tell she and I (who both wanted to do that) have had the bottom drop out of the order of our lives because an element of that paradigm is being taken care of by a man, by God. And my mom doesn't have that and lives in poverty and instability as a single woman at the end of her life. She had to back to school in her 40s and 50s to survive the newer paradigm. She had to learn to stand up for herself and learn that priesthood doesn't mean doing everything your husband tells you. That the tradeoff of being home means that another human being (a man) determines how much income you live on and that if he decides not to, she has no other dignity than to find another man or just live like that. And you might have to stick around even if he has no respect for you (like how he talks to you) because chances are not that you will find another man, so it's better to obey the format and raise the kids and die inside, because at least you get the obedience points. It's not only about the children and a parent being home. It had so many other things twisted up in it, like decision making based on who makes the money. So much. It was never just about parenting, it was about the sovereignty of the woman. And I think you can separate those out as we have done better in these days--a woman choosing to parent from a home base without abrogating her sovereignty. I had to learn that I am whole without having the God-loves-the-traditional-nuclear-family white-Mormon-picket fence paradigm which was shattered away from my life. I am barely in my 50s now pulling myself up out of poverty. I think I'll make it. But, gee, I wanted to get right on having babies and being an at home mom, that obedient, age 19, that I didn't even get a college degree when I was young. I went back when I had five kids. So I had to do both anyway. Actually, I wouldn't have been able to without my mother living with me at the time. I love my children. But I am deeply saddened that they had to come to a home that was more concerned about obedience to checked off boxes (mine, in my 19 year old head) than to the home of a man and woman truly prepared to provide financially, spiritually, emotionally, which might have been the case with more time, more education, more mutual decision making regardless of gender, deeper questions and ponderings and practice about how to choose a partner, a coparent, and create a family than just a set of external criteria. Yes, I was foolish and naive as all young people are. I would say this is not about taking the word of a prophet but of taking the word of anyone other than myself (and partner) for what needs to happen in my life and in my family's life. I apologize for sounding a little intense. It is very triggering for me on a personal basis. I spent years of mental, spiritual, does-God-love-me, what-does-it-really-mean-to-follow-Christ energy on this as my own life changed and progressed. It's very very real and not some academic gospel. I watch my sons and my daughters. I also don't think most of them are ready to be parents. I think a couple never will be. They are whole as they are (barring the journey we all have to more wholeness). They will contribute the gifts they do have to their friends, their world around them.
  3. I honestly had a different "This tells me" experience. As a mother making the decision to go to work in the late 90s and early 2000s (even though I originally was fine with stay-at-home), I guilt-strickenly listened to conferences that said this each time so I could know that was either a sinner or the poor woman who "had" to but would somehow be redeemed in the eternities back into stay-at-home status. Until they didn't . . . because I was listening so closely. "I didn't hear anyone say that!" (also during the late 90s, early 2000s). The closest I heard was to make decisions about it for the best of the family. This told me that we were in a new era not beholden by the past. It's okay for us each to have a different interpretation of the silence. Neither assessment is inherently likely (without asking the leaders directly). I wonder if we could create a society where many jobs were kid-friendly. But where parents go, kids go to learn. I know not all of them would be . . . but again, this society is based on not just God's plan or even God's plan at all, but more accurately the world-economics plan. Or how about a society where the parents work to provide for the village and the little ones sit around the fire and the elders teach them and play with them? So they aren't parented by their parents at all, but by the elders who have more experience with such things anyway. I really also don't know the difference between daycare and school. They are both outsourced parenting. When I was in elementary school, it was very Lord of the Flies, especially recess. So daycare/school is either all right, or it's not, or it's okay with parental participation/oversight, or? There just really isn't one way to do things that has GOD stamped on it once and for all.
  4. No. The capacity to reconcile something (or all things) is not an indication of truth. (And truth is not meant to mean 'facts', either. But I guess this is not a truth thread.) I think your answer or at least more clues is more simple than this whole round of discussion has made it. You are quoting Isaiah. Thus, Jesus actually didn't say that anyway. Isaiah's poetry is not Jesus speaking. The question is why does Isaiah draw upon both the imagery of Noah and of a Redeemer (who is not named Jesus here). Isaiah (or whoever the actual writer, I don't know my transmission scholarship here) is hundreds if not thousands of years away from a purported historical moment of Noah's flood. Isaiah knows as much about the flood (as history or geology) as the average person knows about Isaiah. But the question that interests me is why these 'stories' or templates or symbolisms endured to be drawn upon in a variety of ways, for a variety of purposes, in a variety of ages including ours. Very compelling story. Isaiah does understand "the waters of Noah" symbolically and mythologically and that is what he is trying to get at. The archetype within that story that encapsulates the entire rest of the chapter which is what someone else mentioned, about mercy. (p.s. myth does not mean fiction) P.S. The scriptures are a map for progression. The "waters of Noah" are keywords regarding our progression--not a reference to history or geology. Isaiah used that phrase very particularly. Waters, both in the Noah template (and as referenced by Isaiah) and in the Jaredite template and the Moses template (and others), refer to our sojourn on the earthly plane. We are at this time covered in waters. We are in the deep. Isaiah is Isaiah. He has a very special way with words and with spiritual clarion calls that have been hard to match throughout history. And he had a very specific message he was trying to get across in all of his utterances. He was so angry about how we were/are being human. And so visionary about what we have the capacity to be. To guess, I don't think he was up one whit on any night about whether it was a global flood because he might not have even known there was a globe. He spoke over and over again about the transformation from the lowest form of being human to the highest form of safety, peace, joy of being human. This chapter evokes the transformation.
  5. As if a woman's home were the four walls of a suburban rectangle box with grass on the ground outside. The earth is my home and I can and will do whatever I need to do to make it a paradise for my children: run for office, work in social justice, be an artist, homeschool, move off grid, get a medical degree: whatever I needed to do that was best for my children by showing them the full potential of my talents and by making the world a better place. As if women haven't been working as seamstresses and laundresses and maids and and and and and forever and ever and ever. We are in a very specific historical moment that gives pressures for specific things: 9-5 workdays, public school, Disneyland vacays. I mean, families used to clear land together and plant crops and build their house themselves. None of this is God (or Satan). It's just how things are going historically. I mean, we could move to the jungle and have our kids go with us while we go spear for boar so they can get practice for boar-spearing. Is God fine with this? My dil would go absolutely screaming crazy if she couldn't work all day long as a nurse, about 4 days a week. She needs it. Sometimes she has her son on her days off, sometimes my son has their son on his days off, sometimes he is at daycare "school" which he thrives in, and one day a week he does Grandma. And they all gather together as a family in the evenings. When he was smaller, my daughter, his auntie, was his full time nanny. Right now I just have one teen son at home. He is in school full time. Later this year he will be driving and working and so should I be home while he is gone so much? He needs to see me make decisions about how to use personal and family time: the time we spend together on outings and in the evening to just talk, the housework we both do (or not), the creative projects he watches me bring to fruition, the commitments I make to engage in the community even if it means to be gone from him for a few hours in a day. With me, even with raising kids, there was never "stay at home". There was: let's see what we can do today outside the home. I don't know why I would ever want to be inside four walls most of the time for any reason. The way people work and earn money is changing. For example, people earn money online more often now and that's just going to grow, I think. Is it okay if women make money online while the baby is napping? It's not just all going to the office and coming home with dinner laid out.
  6. Maybe he had Christian progressives in mind; as in Jesus "the great teacher and rebel" and whatnot, but nothing particularly miraculous or salvific.
  7. I'm slowly on and off listening through his Genesis series.
  8. The 'war in heaven' is right now. This is it. One son has been giving his presentation for thousands of years and we have had that captivity because we have chosen and embodied that plan (collectively, not necessarily individually). I think the term 'struggle' is better than war. The struggle is for the purpose of coming into union (love) with one anther while preserving freedom. In 1 Nephi 14 we are taught that there are only two paths. One path is captivity and destruction. One path is liberty, peace, and life. Hopefully, the presentation of the second son (the second who spoke) is about to begin over most of the earth (although it has been available for individuals and small groups at all times), where liberty, peace, and life will be the fruit of embodying the plan and knowledge of this son. What is your vote? Which son? You can only vote by embodying the vote.
  9. Justice is not a penalty. Justice is not subtraction. It is restoration. Justice IS mercy. What you have done unto the least, you have done unto me. You can come into the feast at any time. Isaiah chapter 1:11-17 What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices? I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams and the fat of well-fed beasts; I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs, or of goats.When you come to appear before me, who has required of you this trampling of my courts? Bring no more vain offerings; incense is an abomination to me. New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations—I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly.Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hates; they have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them.When you spread out your hands, I will hide my eyes from you; even though you make many prayers, I will not listen; [I don't care about your baptisms and your priesthood; your special musical numbers and your Sunday School classes; I'm tired of your films and robes . . . that's pretty much what he's saying to a previous generation] YOUR HANDS ARE FULL OF BLOOD Wash yourselves [OF THE BLOOD]; make yourselves clean; remove the evil of your deeds from before my eyes; cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow's cause. verse 27: ZION SHALL BE REDEEMED BY JUSTICE
  10. Really beautiful. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx I don't consider CHRIST or GOD to be one person, but rather the union of all beings in a state of joy. So the Christ or atonement template works differently with that.
  11. I hear you. I've been reading it on and off for over two years and I'm almost halfway through. I can only read one chapter a day because then I have to really digest it.
  12. My favorite is found in A Course in Miracles. And also the New Testament but most people don't use it that way. I just started reading The Forgotten Way by Dekker, I'm curious to see where he takes it. But he has begun by saying that a true Christian keeps no record of wrongs, so that is similar to ACIM. A Course in Miracles is really hard to put in a nutshell, I know that the one I am going to will be misunderstood. But it is that we are innocent, and the atonement is that we remember that. Also I am starting to read some Bonhoeffer and I am seeing shades of that in his writing.
  13. Don't get stuck on the English word 'God'. For as much good as it can hold, it can also lead astray. Hebrew is better for understanding the depths of the history of this reality we now say in English as 'God'. The main point is, is that as Beings we have the capacity for unlimited potential and we are on a journey to reach that, in time and eternity. It's really not that mysterious. But it is wonderful.
  14. You're welcome, sis. The topic made me think of it, lol.
  15. I couldn't find a smaller clip, so go to 38:50 for a short scene.
  16. A church leader quote can be found for everything within two hundred years of speeches. I read the scriptures and come to my own understanding. I can find a quote for that, too. As far as I can tell from this quote (without reading the whole speech), I think Elder Oaks' point is that preparation is real, not just getting a ticket for being in the (so-called) right Church (or whatever token). P.S. You don't even have to be Christian to be prepared.
  17. I recently wrote this bit about the Shiz/Coriantumr story etc.: /////////////////////////////////// The Book of Mormon is the parable presentation of two societies whose end became complete destruction with only one man left alive. In one example, the man was the individual who "won". He was the last man standing after killing the second-to-last-man standing. He looked out on vast fields of dead and rotting human beings. The armies had been kin of the same nation with their main point of conflict being blood revenge rules (stupid!) and fighting over which of the ruling class would be their tyrant--which flavor of oppression they preferred better. That man regretted his own indulgences of doing whatever was necessary to live a victory life (that's not what he got!), but it was too late. He lived to an old age as a broken-hearted relic in another community that took him in. In the other example, the man last left had reluctantly participated as a general in the fighting since his family (ancestry) were military men; even though he also tried to be a man of God. He had to fight not so much in defense, but because their own people were trigger happy on the offense and were hungry for war; enmity that was a remnant of a hundreds-year-old narrative that had probably lost accuracy and nuance whilst increasing in grievance and hatred; and that had begun in the mists of history with brothers that couldn't learn to love each other. He felt a loyalty to the same name/nation they were under, so at first he fought. He eventually made the choice to stop fighting which made running, wandering, and hiding his only other choice; which lonely and dangerous existence he lived out the rest of his days. "They were given up unto the hardness of their hearts, and the blindness of their minds . . . They were drunken with anger, even as a man who is drunken with wine; and they slept . . . upon their swords." Ether 15:19-22 How drunk are you with anger? Are you sleeping on your sword? How attached are you to your narrative of enmity that you inherited from generations before? The reason there are two stories like this in the Book of Mormon is to warn us not to become the third. "Enoch said unto the Lord: How is it that thou canst weep, seeing thou art holy, and from all eternity to all eternity? . . . The Lord said unto Enoch: Behold these THY BRETHREN . . . I have said that they should love one another . . . but behold, they are without affection, and they hate their own blood." (The Book of Moses 7:28-33, Pearl of Great Price) Are you still buying up armies and navies with the desires of your heart or the consents of your ignorance, so that blood and horror may reign on the earth? Or are you willing to release your enmity, know your brethren affectionately, and become a Christ? /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
  18. Great questions. I want to caution you as I often take the opportunity to caution anyone on the same matter. Scriptures (Book of Mormon, Bible, Quran, etc) aren't true or valuable or 'a feast' because they are reconcilable. Lots and lots and lots of things don't make sense and match up within the scriptures. You'll find many contradictions. Many reject the scriptures when they become defeated in their inability to reconcile everything all together, as if that was the promise the scriptures held out. "We promise you," the scriptures say (do NOT say), "that we are completely reconcilable and through this reconciliation you will be saved." NOT. NOT! I'm not saying that you are rejecting the scriptures, but I see you here reaching for reconciliation, and don't worry if you never do manage to have it all line up in perfect sense. It doesn't mean you've missed the truth or the food that is there, the salvation that is there, the living water that is there. In fact, it is in the very cracks of the scriptures where they don't match up that I often fall down a deep hole of revelation and feast to the degree that most of the scripture I read when I open the books isn't even what is written in English on the page. There's a set of scriptures between the lines of what is written. Going along with that, and despite appearances since they seem to be ancient stories, the scriptures (Book of Mormon et al) are not meant to be descriptions of the past or the future, nor to provide a historical timeline of any kind. They specifically relate to YOUR PROGRESSION, RIGHT NOW. Every single word, verse, story, chapter, book. YOUR REDEMPTION AND PROGRESSION. There is very little worth in them otherwise. These progressions aren't always or almost never are ethical proscriptions, but they are literally maps or patterns that we have the capacity to move from one to the other and become new creatures. And the maps aren't all in order. The reveal themselves to you over time of deep study--where a single phrase in the Doctrine in Covenants goes along with a section of, say, Habbakuk which is blown wide open when you hear a particular story of the life of Lord Krishna and sets you to laughing and changes the cells in your body when you see the very same thing, plain as day, in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. And then you see it taking place in real time with real human beings. Having said that, let me make some notes on the things you are curious about. Obviously, I don't have complete answers, because they can only come to you as YOUR answers for YOU. Ether is HIGHLY symbolic, HIGHLY. Not low or medium symbolic. HIGH. Ether is not the beginner's map. verse 7 note: any time the scriptures speak of the visitation of Christ, this is not particularly a historical timeline appearance, but a progression in YOU: the visitation of CHRIST that you will experience; note on faith: scriptural faith is NOT a fervency of desire and believing--faith IS creation; namely the becoming of YOU and then further as you bless your loved ones and your community until we all come to Zion note on the houses: they were nomadic tents, so flammable note on the story of Shiz and Coriantumr: this story was added as a second witness to the message Mormon wanted to make with the Book of Mormon; Moroni added the story, continuing his father's mission. They both had watched their civilization fall to uninterrupted bloodshed; and Moroni showed another story where something happened like it; and the point is to urge us not to do the same. note on the mountain:
  19. Most numbers in the scriptures are symbolic. Are you Christian? Does it mean 50 percent of Christians? Or 50 percent of humanity? Or is there something more important to be gained from it? It's possible the number doesn't matter at all here, simply the binary of prepared-not prepared. Not all LDS are permanently stuck in scripture interpretation kindergarten. I mean, that's what it says in the scriptures. 🙄
  20. There are two Ways. Getting gain at the cost of/sacrificing innocence/human life (bloodshed and captivity). Or being willing to and sometimes actually releasing all gain for the purpose of saving/giving life and innocence (liberation, redemption).
  21. "the temple"? The fact that I don't readily know what you are talking about shows that I can be a member without needing to know this. I do need to know that Jesus is my Savior. The real answer might be that we don't need to explain predictions nor live by them (if indeed they were meant to be timeline predictions), but rather live a Christlike life right now regardless.
  22. And my fave Mark chapter 9:38-40 “Teacher,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.” “Do not stop him,” Jesus said . . . for whoever is not against us is for us."
  23. My opinion, but also I did not make it up, others better than me hold it; and I should say in my view more than my opinion but rather what I get from my reading of the scriptures themselves: anyone who reads the scriptures literally has not read them at all (and has become more or less dangerous in their prescriptions for themselves and others). Scriptures are presented symbolically and require keys to unlock all the levels. The literal version is actually a veil for those not prepared. It can also serve as a learning device for children to learn by rote so that they are later prepared for the deeper work; midrash as the Jews call it. What is symbolized is true. What is literal is not true at least in the sense that it is seeing through a glass darkly. Invoking truth always deserves a discussion on what truth is, which is a rabbit hole. Scriptural truth is something different than our modern usage, which goes to 'accuracy'; but scriptural truth goes more to what causes integrity and joy (freedom, love, glory, etc) in the human being. In older English usage, a person could be true (faithful). 'Truth' was not an adjective for concepts or information as it has become now. So we are just off the road and in the mud when it comes to our preparation to gather salvation from the scriptures. Even as I Am can be a very large discussion, but to summarize it for myself, it is the choice made that can be considered the sacrifice of the Lamb. Instead of causing death at the sins of others toward/upon us (pre-Law of Moses); instead of balancing act of the Law of Moses (eye for an eye); we instead offer good and healing and forgiveness and bearing (see 1 corinthians re charity) toward all the sins (=how they hurt us) of people (specifically toward us). We return good upon evil. i.e. post Law of Moses or the Gospel of Christ. Each one of us is crucified in this world, each one of us has a broken heart. But the choice for a contrite spirit and the choice to NOT become crucifiers because we ourselves were crucified ("Hurt people hurt people" as Marianne Williamson wrote), but rather to rise (out of the tomb) and become saviors and healers and resurrecters--that is the Even as I Am.
×
×
  • Create New...