Sharon Eubanks' Talk Quoted On Church Newsroom

[mfbukowski]

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/this-is-a-womans-church-says-director-humanitarian-services?cid=social_20140812_29637936

I think this makes it clear that this a direction the church might take. I find that very exciting. I suspected that while I watched her speak at the conference.

[Stargazer]

Wow! I am blown away!

Thanks for posting this.

[Deborah]

I'd like to see OW address this. So far they haven't that I've seen.

[katherine the great]

I like her style!

[jwhitlock]

That was a great talk. One point (out of many) that struck me was that she used "patriarchy" and "matriarchy" in their proper context, as empowering, cooperative ideals. In our society, the term "patriarchy" has taken on a negative connotation because of its misuse as a pejorative term. Her talk goes a long way towards countering that.

[Bikeemikey]

I also liked her talk and tone.

[mfbukowski]

Yes I think it is a VERY significant step and the fact that the church would put it on the "Newsroom" is a clear indication of the direction they will be taking- in my opinion.

 

Remember that is the same site they used to make their statement about what constitutes "doctrine"- which is a post we see quoted around here all the time.

 

This is about as close to a "church statement" as one can get without it being stated in General Conference.  Big NEWS as far as I see it.

 

It practically makes the idea of the "Divine Pair" doctrine- of course it pretty much always has been, but now the idea has a name.

Edited August 16, 2014 by mfbukowski

[ERayR]

Yes I think it is a VERY significant step and the fact that the church would put it on the "Newsroom" is a clear indication of the direction they will be taking- in my opinion.

 

Remember that is the same site they used to make their statement about what constitutes "doctrine"- which is a post we see quoted around here all the time.

 

This is about as close to a "church statement" as one can get without it being stated in General Conference.  Big NEWS as far as I see it.

 

It practically makes the idea of the "Divine Pair" doctrine- of course it pretty much always has been, but now the idea has a name.

 

To anybody who has been to the temple and thought about the endowment it is nothing new.  Sister Eubank just verbalized it more plainly.

 

Coming soon - discussions on the board about what she really meant.

Edited August 16, 2014 by ERayR

[mfbukowski]

To anybody who has been to the temple and thought about the endowment it is nothing new.  Sister Eubank just verbalized it more plainly.

 

Coming soon - discussions on the board about what she really meant.

Yes, the objective reality of a Divine Pair and whether or not they are unified by Substance. 

[Tacenda]

I also liked her talk and tone.

Interesting, I liked her tone too.

[ERayR]

Yes, the objective reality of a Divine Pair and whether or not they are unified by Substance. 

 

And what does unity really mean in regards to the priesthoods.

[blooit]

Funny... after reading the Salt Lake Trashbune article about her talk, you'd think she conducted a full-on attack on the church and the priesthood.

 

I wish that rag would go bankrupt already.

[Senator]

in my view the most significant point in her whole speech was that there's a huge humanitarian crisis happening right now in Iraq. What are we doing wasting our time and energy on these other side shows.

[Deborah]

Exactly, Senator.

[Tacenda]

Exactly, Senator.

ditto

[wenglund]

in my view the most significant point in her whole speech was that there's a huge humanitarian crisis happening right now in Iraq. What are we doing wasting our time and energy on these other side shows.

 

Great point.

 

In fact, it is so salient that I hope you have posted it on the OW thread (I am preventing form viewing the thread so I don't know if you have and I won't be able to tell if you have), if not also the OW facebook page or wherever they have their "discussions" published.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited August 18, 2014 by wenglund

[katherine the great]

in my view the most significant point in her whole speech was that there's a huge humanitarian crisis happening right now in Iraq. What are we doing wasting our time and energy on these other side shows.

That was a very important part of her talk, but her comments on church councils were also very eye opening to me.

[theplains]

I had a few questions on some of what she said.

 

"We had personality and we had volition, and we chose to ally ourselves with a Heavenly Father

and a Heavenly Mother who could put us on the road to exaltation. So, they gave us a spirit body.

And they made the opportunity for us to get a mortal, physical body"

 

Why does she feel that Heavenly Mother had a role in us getting a physical body?

 

"This kind of progression that we are on starts off with an intelligence. This is just my word, but I’m

going to call that the First Self. My First Self has a personality that is completely unique".

 

Did this 'self' exclude gender?

 

"And so Jesus Christ, as His intelligence, He says in the scriptures, “I am the self-existent one, I Am.”

And He was the strongest and probably the most intelligent of all the intelligences".

 

Does intelligence equate to strength?

 

A church manual says of Jesus, "By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle

of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre-existent

state" (Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual, 2004, page 10).

 

It seems that he was always competing with other intelligences to see who was more intelligent.

And finally he reached some level of intelligence which ranked him as a God.

 

Thanks,

Jim

[USU78]

Yes, the objective reality of a Divine Pair and whether or not they are unified by Substance. 

 

Dang . . . when I first read this I saw "unified by Sunstone" . . . silly me.

Edited August 18, 2014 by USU78

[ERayR]

Dang . . . when I first read this I say "unified by Sunstone" . . . silly me.

 

Pay attention or you will get left behind.

Edited August 18, 2014 by ERayR

[mfbukowski]

Dang . . . when I first read this I say "unified by Sunstone" . . . silly me.

Hey why not?  The "powerful play" is not even scripted yet and even they- I am sure- "will contribute a verse" 

[mfbukowski]

 

I had a few questions on some of what she said.

 

Well her words are not my words, but I will give a stab at what she might have meant.  I hope this is not "mansplainin" but heck I really don't care anymore.

 

But it is really cool to be discussing HER version of theology here on the board!

 

"We had personality and we had volition, and we chose to ally ourselves with a Heavenly Father

and a Heavenly Mother who could put us on the road to exaltation. So, they gave us a spirit body.

And they made the opportunity for us to get a mortal, physical body"

 

Why does she feel that Heavenly Mother had a role in us getting a physical body?

Well if we believe in a Divine Pair, clearly She was a full partner with Father in coming up with the whole idea of creation in the first place.  I certainly don't make any important decisions without consulting my wife, and I would think creating and populating a universe would be an important decision.

 

He does nothing without Her and She does nothing with out Him.  They are perfectly unified beings.  So yes, they both "gave us spirit bodies" AND the physical universe starting with Adam and Eve, and therefore an "opportunity for us to get a mortal, physical body".

 

That is what I think she means.

"This kind of progression that we are on starts off with an intelligence. This is just my word, but I’m

going to call that the First Self. My First Self has a personality that is completely unique".

 

Did this 'self' exclude gender?

No, it includes gender.  The Proclamation on the Family tells us that specifically.

 

"And so Jesus Christ, as His intelligence, He says in the scriptures, “I am the self-existent one, I Am.”

And He was the strongest and probably the most intelligent of all the intelligences".

 

Does intelligence equate to strength?

Well if you have no body and are a disembodied intelligence, it is not like you are flexing your biceps or anything.  I don't see how it could mean anything else.  Strength of character, persuasiveness, etc would be included I imagine.

 

A church manual says of Jesus, "By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle

of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre-existent

state" (Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual, 2004, page 10).

 

It seems that he was always competing with other intelligences to see who was more intelligent.

And finally he reached some level of intelligence which ranked him as a God.

I have no clue where you get the idea of "competition", I find that kind of odd.

 

We all- oops I mean most of us- grow in wisdom and intelligence as we gain experience and understanding.  Of course there are others who don't.  But competition makes no sense to me whatsoever.

[mfbukowski]

In our society, the term "patriarchy" has taken on a negative connotation because of its misuse as a pejorative term.

So much so that at least the first of their "conversations" begs the question in concluding that patriarchy is oppressive.  They start out with that assumption and then conclude that any male leadership is patriarchy and therefore abusive.

 

Pretty poor argument.  This woman is a lawyer?  I hope she is a litigator because she certainly knows how to win a debate without any good arguments at all.

 

Juries don't demand logic- just a persuasive show.

Edited August 18, 2014 by mfbukowski