changed Posted October 16, 2012 Author Posted October 16, 2012 (edited) I can't quite follow your meaning. Are you saying that the Heavenly Mother does not know who She is, and is walking among us oblivious to the fact that She is not really a mortal, and that that's why She has seemingly gone missing?No... I'm saying women currently do not know who they are - and that there is a purpose behind this.... the greatest among you, is your servant. Christianity is set up with a different structure than the rest of the world - it's not about being in front of others, it's about being with them... it's not about pride, it's about being humble, kind, understanding - seeing one another face to face... Jesus came to Earth to have the human experience and come to an understanding of what we are experiencing... Women, in their role as servants and helpmeets, are also getting that experience. Th whole point is to become a better leader - the best leaders are the ones who intimately understand their followers. Edited October 16, 2012 by changed
changed Posted October 16, 2012 Author Posted October 16, 2012 She doesn't exist according to most other faiths. As far as I know. Is that maybe why the church doesn't dwell on her? Does the bible even mention anything about a mother in heaven?I think the Bible talks quiet a bit about Her... that is, if you know what names She goes by it does.
changed Posted October 16, 2012 Author Posted October 16, 2012 She is invisible because she never shows up in visions, have you read Lehi's vision of the tree of life?...Have you ever heard a prophet record what she said? I think Matthew 3:17 may have been Her voice...as I said in a previous post, 3 Nephi 22 really is a good chapter to read for those who want to know of Her great sacrifice.... the whole chapter is about the wife of the Lord of Hosts...(Book of Mormon | 3 Nephi 22:5 - 6)5 For thy maker, thy husband, the Lord of Hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel—the God of the whole earth shall he be called.6 For the Lord hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit...
wenglund Posted October 16, 2012 Posted October 16, 2012 Does she need any other name besides the glorious "Mother"?If we understand the depth of that role I see little need for other titles.This bears repeating.Thanks, -Wade Englund-
wenglund Posted October 16, 2012 Posted October 16, 2012 (edited) A CFR is not appropriate on an opinion.It is appropriate if the opinion is:1. Not clearly identified as opinion and is stated emphatically as if it fact,2. Goes beyond expressing one's own private perspective to declaring how "we" as "Mormons" view things.You did both. The CFR stands. You are entitled to speak nonsensically for yourself--as you typically do. You aren't entitled to speak nonsensically for the Church and its members. CFRs are a valid way to help prevent you from doing the latter.Thanks, -Wade Englund- Edited October 16, 2012 by wenglund
Fly Fisherman Posted October 16, 2012 Posted October 16, 2012 (edited) Does she need any other name besides the glorious "Mother"?If we understand the depth of that role I see little need for other titles.I don't see this thread about the need to give her a name, but about the possibility that perhaps there could be names in the scriptures about her. Whether those names really are about Heavenly Mother or not, each can decide for himself/herself.While we are at it, let's conjecture about gender-specific names for however many angels can dance on the head of a pin.Thanks, -Wade Englund-Much discussion on this board is about what is possible in theory (D&C 97:14) about many subjects. I don't see why those "in theory" discussions cannot include possible names for Heavenly Mother. Edited October 16, 2012 by Fly Fisherman 1
Damien the Leper Posted October 16, 2012 Posted October 16, 2012 While we are at it, let's conjecture about gender-specific names for however many angels can dance on the head of a pin.Thanks, -Wade Englund-You need to stop.
changed Posted October 16, 2012 Author Posted October 16, 2012 Thanks, yes, I'm not trying to say anything is doctrine - just putting out an idea, that like Heavenly Father and Jesus, She might have more than one name too... the reason we use more than one name for Heavenly Father / Savior, perhaps so that we are not overly repetition, not wearing anyone's names out - just sort of a reverential way to speak I guess. This is a wonderful talk, she talk about Heavenly Mother at the end...http://www.lds.org/ensign/1987/10/one-thing-needful-becoming-women-of-greater-faith-in-christ?lang=eng&query=%22the+lord+has+not+placed+us+in+this+lone+and+dreary+world+%22"The Lord has not placed us in this lone and dreary world without a blueprint for living. In Doctrine and Covenants 52, we read the Lord’s words: “I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived.” (D&C 52:14; italics added.) He certainly includes us women in that promise. He has given us patterns in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price; and he has given us patterns in the temple ceremony. As we study these patterns, we must continually ask, “Why does the Lord choose to say these particular words and present it in just this way?” We know he uses metaphors and symbols and parables and allegories to teach us of his eternal ways. We have all recognized the relationship between Abraham and Isaac that so parallels God’s anguish over the sacrifice of his son, Jesus Christ. But, as women, do we stretch ourselves and also ask about Sarah’s travail in this experience as well? We need to search in this manner, and we need always to look for deeper meaning. We should look for parallels and symbols. We should look for themes and motifs such as those we would find in a Bach or a Mozart composition, and we should look for repeated patterns.".."I have never questioned why our mother in heaven seems veiled to us, for I believe the Lord has his reasons for revealing as little as he has on that subject. Furthermore, I believe we know much more about our eternal nature than we think we do; and it is our sacred obligation to express our knowledge, to teach it to our young sisters and daughters, and in so doing to strengthen their faith and help them through the counterfeit confusions of these difficult latter days. Let me point out some examples."
wenglund Posted October 16, 2012 Posted October 16, 2012 Much discussion on this board is about what is possible in theory (D&C 97:14) about many subjects. I don't see why those "in theory" discussions cannot include possible names for Heavenly Mother. No one is questioning people's right to speculate about the possible names for Heavenly Mother. I was simply questioning the efficacy in doing so. There are "in theory" discussions here that may enhance our growth unto Christ, and others that don't, and may even run the risk of the opposite. To each their own.Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Cobalt-70 Posted October 16, 2012 Posted October 16, 2012 No... I'm saying women currently do not know who they are - and that there is a purpose behind this.... the greatest among you, is your servant. Christianity is set up with a different structure than the rest of the world - it's not about being in front of others, it's about being with them... it's not about pride, it's about being humble, kind, understanding - seeing one another face to face... Jesus came to Earth to have the human experience and come to an understanding of what we are experiencing... Women, in their role as servants and helpmeets, are also getting that experience. Th whole point is to become a better leader - the best leaders are the ones who intimately understand their followers.Men need leadership experience too. So why aren't men given the gender role of being servants and "helpmeets"?(By the way, the word "helpmeet" is not a real word. KJV Genesis 2:18 says "an help meet for," which means "a helper suitable for." You can help someone without being their servant.)Besides, if the end goal of women being confined to the role of "servants and helpmeets" on the earth is so that they can be great queens, then why is the Heavenly Mother still invisible, silent, and subordinate? Hasn't she served her time?
MiserereNobis Posted October 16, 2012 Posted October 16, 2012 I have an idea... you all could start praying to the Queen of Heaven, the Blessed Virgin Mary
Cobalt-70 Posted October 16, 2012 Posted October 16, 2012 (edited) have you read Lehi's vision of the tree of life?...The tree of life in that vision is not the Heavenly Mother. If anything, the tree represents the Virgin Mary. But even if it is Heavenly Mother, what kind of a symbol is that? She is silent, passive, and is useful only for her physical beauty and the desirable fruits of her body. Is that the model what we want for the prototype woman?as I said in a previous post, 3 Nephi 22 really is a good chapter to read for those who want to know of Her great sacrifice.... the whole chapter is about the wife of the Lord of Hosts...(Book of Mormon | 3 Nephi 22:5 - 6)5 For thy maker, thy husband, the Lord of Hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel—the God of the whole earth shall he be called.6 For the Lord hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit...In this verse, taken from Deutero-Isaiah, the woman is Israel, not the Heavenly Mother. Edited October 16, 2012 by Cobalt-70
changed Posted October 16, 2012 Author Posted October 16, 2012 The tree of life in that vision is not the Heavenly Mother. If anything, the tree represents the Virgin Mary. But even if it is Heavenly Mother, what kind of a symbol is that? She is silent, passive, and is useful only for her physical beauty and the desirable fruits of her body. Is that the model what we want for the prototype woman? The tree of life in that vision represents everything that we, as saints, are striving to achieve as we press forward holding fast to the iron rod. It represents the ultimate joy, the most precious fruit, it's the grand finale of what everything is leading up to... In this verse, taken from Deutero-Isaiah, the woman is Israel, not the Heavenly Mother.Well, I'm pretty sure Sr. Holland agrees with me... at least she also suggested looking at Sarah (who was barren) as being a symbol of our Heavenly Mother...
Cobalt-70 Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) The tree of life in that vision represents everything that we, as saints, are striving to achieve as we press forward holding fast to the iron rod. It represents the ultimate joy, the most precious fruit, it's the grand finale of what everything is leading up to...I do think that there is some rather Freudian dream symbolism in this vision. But I don't think we are supposed to read Heavenly Mother into it and take the dream as a foundation for our theology. Okay, so the tree is a woman, she is "exceedingly beautiful," and her fruit is "desirable to make one happy. And there are these men pursuing her by following an "iron rod" while people are laughing at them (kind of a "naked at school" dream element). That tells us a lot about the mind of Lehi/Joseph Smith, Sr., but I don't think it was ever meant to represent Mormon theology. The Book of Mormon was written in a very Trinitarian context, and it was not the Heavenly Mother, but the Virgin Mary, that has been linked to this tree. Edited October 17, 2012 by Cobalt-70
Kevin Christensen Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 For some real context on the Tree of Life story, the kinds of thing that never ever show up by those who assume that the story of Lehi's dream comes out of Joseph Smith's navel gazing:Daniel Petersonhttp://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=13&chapid=94Alyson Von Feldt:http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=19&num=1&id=639http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/papers/?paperID=9&chapterID=74Hugh Nibley:http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=60&chapid=602Wilfred Griggs, on Ancient Near Eastern counterpartshttp://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=110&chapid=1278John W. Welch on the Narrative of Zosimushttp://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=41&chapid=193And Margaret Barker:http://www.joehunt.org/joseph-smith-margaret-barker-talk.htmlhttp://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/WhereshallWisdombefound.pdfAnd yours truely:http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=2&num=1&id=16which has things like this:Nibley demonstrated that the dream imagery is culturally specific to Lehi's desert lifestyle.34 The dream is also archetypally symbolic compared to the medieval accounts discussed by Carol Zaleski, and with the cross-cultural representations of heaven and hell gathered by Stanislav and Christina Grof. For example, Zaleski's description of the guide in medieval accounts applies equally to Nephi's experience.The guide . . . escorts the visionary from place to place, pushing the story forward and interpreting the inner significance of otherworld scenes; he thus calls attention to the symbolic character of the other world, and the need for spiritual instruction in this life and the next.35Lehi's account of the iron rod, and many people being lost in mists of darkness, and falling into the filthy river echoes many of the medieval "Test Bridge" accounts in Zaleski.36 Common motifs in the medieval visionary literature include the "river of hell, the flowery meadows of paradise, the white-clothed throngs in heaven, the test-bridge."37 According to Zaleski, the test bridge of medieval vision literature "symbolizes safe passage" across the river but also "intensifies the dangers of crossing otherworld boundaries. Whoever sets foot on its narrow planks is singled out for the attention of forces seeking the soul's downfall."38 The righteous "cross easily to the meadows on the opposite shore while the unjust lose their footing and fall."39 The iron rod in Lehi's vision performs a symbolic function equivalent to the test bridge of medieval visions.Combinations of symbols in some of the judgment scenes in Beyond Death40 also invite comparison with Lehi's dream. Despite the different cultures—Aztec, medieval Christian, Haitian, Zoroastrian, and Buddhist—we recognize the filthy rivers as boundary and obstacle, test bridges, symbols of heaven and hell, trees of life, and the judgments of wicked and the just.Kuhn had observed that:P]articularly persuasive arguments can be developed if the new paradigm permits the prediction of phenomena that had been entirely unsuspected while the old one prevailed.[1][1] Ibid., 154.Nibley, citing Blass on the science of textual criticism:But how can we be certain about anything in criticizing the Book of Mormon? To this Blass gives us the answer: the nearest we can get to certainty, he says, is when we have before us a long, historical document, for it is "improbable in the highest degree, and therefore to be regarded at all times as inadmissible that any forger coming later [than the pretended date of authorship] can have the knowledge and diligence necessary to present any quantity of historical data without running into contradictions." In this, the one sure way of detecting a falsifier, according to our guide, is by those things which he cannot well have succeeded in imitating because they were too trifling, too inconspicuous, and too troublesome to reproduce.9In Lehi in the Desert we said: The test of an historical document lies, as we have so often insisted, not in the story it tells, but in the casual details that only an eyewitness can have seen.10 It is in such incidental and inconspicuous details that the Book of Mormon shines. Blass, then, notes that when these details occur in considerable numbers (as they certainly do in the Book of Mormon), we can confidently assume a genuine text; and, above all, when the large numbers of details fit together and prove each other, we have the strongest proof of all, for difficulties increase not mathematically with the length of a document, but geometrically.11FWIWKevin ChristensenBethel Park, PA 2
changed Posted October 17, 2012 Author Posted October 17, 2012 The simple truth about what the tree of life is... (Guide to the Scriptures | T Tree of Life.:Entry) TREE OF LIFE. See also EdenA tree in the Garden of Eden and the paradise of God (Gen. 2:9; Rev. 2:7). In Lehi's dream the tree of life represents the love of God and is referred to as the greatest of all the gifts of God (1 Ne. 8; 11:21–22, 25; 15:36).Cherubim and a flaming sword keep the way of the tree of life, Gen. 3:24 (Alma 12:21–23; 42:2–6). John saw the tree of life, and the leaves had healing power for the nations, Rev. 22:2. Lehi beheld the tree of life, 1 Ne. 8:10–35. Nephi saw the tree his father saw, 1 Ne. 11:8–9. The iron rod leads to the tree of life, 1 Ne. 11:25 (1 Ne. 15:22–24). An awful gulf separates the wicked from the tree of life, 1 Ne. 15:28, 36. It must needs be that there was a forbidden fruit in opposition to the tree of life, 2 Ne. 2:15. Come unto the Lord and partake of the fruit of the tree of life, Alma 5:34, 62. If our first parents had partaken of the tree of life, they would have been forever miserable, Alma 12:26. If ye will not nourish the word, ye can never pluck of the fruit of the tree of life, Alma 32:40. The Lord planted the tree of life in the midst of the garden, Moses 3:9 (Abr. 5:9). God sent Adam from Eden lest he partake of the tree of life and live forever, Moses 4:28–31. Men need leadership experience too. So why aren't men given the gender role of being servants?I probably should not reply at all to the above, and I will not answer it directly, but I will throw out a little snippet from another thread... which points to another reason some things are hidden. ... Pharaoh was blessed with the blessings of the Earth and Wisdom … which cursed him from the Priesthood.
Kevin Christensen Posted October 28, 2012 Posted October 28, 2012 I got my copy of Margaret Barker's The Mother of the Lord: Volume 1: The Lady in the Temple. I've been reading it on my train commute for the past few days, and am 115 pages in. Very impressive. Pages 54 to 75 focus on Jeremiah and his relationship to the reform. I've long hoped that she should take a close look at Jeremiah due to his proximity to the reform. Before this, she has mostly only commented on the passage in Jer 44 about those in Egypt who blamed the fall of Jerusalem on their neglect of the Queen of Heaven. This goes much deeper, and also brings in some interesting material related to, but not included in the canonical Jeremiah.On page 108, she looks closely at the title The Holy One, and suggests that sometimes, (not always) it can refer to the Mother.FWIWKevin ChristensenBethel Park, PA 1
Deardorff Posted October 30, 2012 Posted October 30, 2012 From what I have read of Plural Marriage and its importance in L-dS belief I am not surprised that no one seems to know the name of a Mother in Heaven.The God would have many wives if what is taught is correct. Many women pumping out 'spirit children' to populate all those worlds - most likely many 'mothers in heaven' so one name would not work within the system.Don't know if it works that way but that is my reading of L-dS scripture and Journal of Discourses and Mormon History.
changed Posted October 30, 2012 Author Posted October 30, 2012 I got my copy of Margaret Barker's The Mother of the Lord:Where did you get a copy of it from? Amazon has it, for $81.00 http://www.amazon.com/The-Mother-Lord-Volume-Temple/dp/0567362469/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1351566501&sr=8-1&keywords=Margaret+Barker%27s+The+Mother+of+the+Lord%3A+Volume+1Is there a better place to get it from? It sounds like an interesting read.
changed Posted October 30, 2012 Author Posted October 30, 2012 From what I have read of Plural Marriage and its importance in L-dS belief I am not surprised that no one seems to know the name of a Mother in Heaven.The God would have many wives if what is taught is correct. Many women pumping out 'spirit children' to populate all those worlds - most likely many 'mothers in heaven' so one name would not work within the system.Don't know if it works that way but that is my reading of L-dS scripture and Journal of Discourses and Mormon History.I've said this before, but I will say it again, because I don't like this view that keeps floating around.... I believe that we have only one Mother in Heaven, that polygamy is symbolic of Mary - a virgin handmaid - being the mother of Jesus, and was a temporary arrangement.... I don't think spirit children are begotten (Jesus is the "only" begotten, the only one, and he was begotten by a handmaid - so that means She does not beget children imo... Eve was unable to beget children in her perfect form too... pregnancy is the cursed way of having children - I think the non-cursed way of adopting immortal intelligences is more akin to baptism, to making and keeping covenants.)
Kevin Christensen Posted October 30, 2012 Posted October 30, 2012 (edited) Where did you get a copy of it from? Amazon has it, for $81.00 http://www.amazon.co... Lord: Volume 1Is there a better place to get it from? It sounds like an interesting read.I got my copy from Amazon, but went for the paperback edition. http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0567528154/ref=tmm_pap_new_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=new&qid=1351611005&sr=8-2You can also look at Amazon UK. Margaret's work is always enlightening.Best,Kevin ChristensenBethel Park, PA Edited October 30, 2012 by Kevin Christensen
Calm Posted October 30, 2012 Posted October 30, 2012 You might try inter library loans. Talk to your local reference librarian.
Recommended Posts