The Heavenly Mother as Creatrix

[mfbukowski]

Just now, The Nehor said:

Ask her if she is laughing with you or at you?  

Uh, I am not sure i want to know the answer.

 

[USU78]

24 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Uh, I am not sure i want to know the answer.

Come on, Mark, we've got some Spieltrieb going on here, and another player on the field.

[mfbukowski]

32 minutes ago, Calm said:

It was an error when we reformatted, it dropped the name...they were going to fix that, probably forgot in the turmoil of other things.  I will try and remember to remind them...

I think that is missing a huge opportunity to reach out.  That she would publish that and speak at FAIR is HUGE.  It should be quoted as many times as possible to get folks over to the website.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

I think that is missing a huge opportunity to reach out.  That she would publish that and speak at FAIR is HUGE.  It should be quoted as many times as possible to get folks over to the website.

It has only been that way for a few months and it is that way for all authors except maybe the current crop...

[strappinglad]

²⁷ So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

OK , I need a clarification of this verse. There is an obvious implication , but I am not familiar with the ' original ' language and need to know what the OT scholar types have said about it. Direction to sources is fine. Current thinking here is fine as well.

[USU78]

16 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

²⁷ So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

OK , I need a clarification of this verse. There is an obvious implication , but I am not familiar with the ' original ' language and need to know what the OT scholar types have said about it. Direction to sources is fine. Current thinking here is fine as well.

Have a gander at the linkee. There's more to this than Genesis

[Maidservant]

There are two places off the top of my head in the ancient scriptures showing women (mothers) as the necessary element for the lineage authority (for their sons) of the priesthood and salvation (and there may be more once one has the keys and type to see it).

The first is in Genesis, where the son of the woman (not the man) will bruise the serpent's head.

The second is that it is NOT a son of Abraham who keeps the priesthood lineage (because Ishmael was a son of Abraham; not to say that he didn't have priesthood, I'm sure he did); but rather it was required that it be a son of SARAH.

I am already diligently creating a world for my children, in my weakness.  I imagine exalted women (i.e. a heavenly mother) doing the same.  It's not a great mystery to me.

I do remember have distinct sensations at the times that I have delivered my oldest son, and then my oldest daughter, in turn to the temple for their endowments.  I felt like Hannah, receiving children of the Lord, and then delivering them back.

The garment of the holy priesthood IS the body; and our passage through this earth life IS the holy of holies; so it IS something that mothers deliver to their sons and their daughters every day.

You might like looking into the Tiamat connection to the first verse(s) of Genesis.  Not sure how accurate it is, but it is the idea that the initial water and deep was specifically understood to be a female element (that would then be wherefrom all creation sprang from).

These are just some various bits of thought I have.

I do want to state on record that I absolutely do not see the Holy Ghost as the Mother in Heaven, for very specific reasons, one namely being that the presidency of three is a male configuration; and the Heavenly Mother is above, beyond, before, encompassing, transcendent of that configuration.  She has her own groove, and it isn't (particularly) the Holy Ghost (in my understanding).

[USU78]

10 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

There are two places off the top of my head in the ancient scriptures showing women (mothers) as the necessary element for the lineage authority (for their sons) of the priesthood and salvation (and there may be more once one has the keys and type to see it).

The first is in Genesis, where the son of the woman (not the man) will bruise the serpent's head.

The second is that it is NOT a son of Abraham who keeps the priesthood lineage (because Ishmael was a son of Abraham; not to say that he didn't have priesthood, I'm sure he did); but rather it was required that it be a son of SARAH.

I am already diligently creating a world for my children, in my weakness.  I imagine exalted women (i.e. a heavenly mother) doing the same.  It's not a great mystery to me.

I do remember have distinct sensations at the times that I have delivered my oldest son, and then my oldest daughter, in turn to the temple for their endowments.  I felt like Hannah, receiving children of the Lord, and then delivering them back.

The garment of the holy priesthood IS the body; and our passage through this earth life IS the holy of holies; so it IS something that mothers deliver to their sons and their daughters every day.

You might like looking into the Tiamat connection to the first verse(s) of Genesis.  Not sure how accurate it is, but it is the idea that the initial water and deep was specifically understood to be a female element (that would then be wherefrom all creation sprang from).

These are just some various bits of thought I have.

I do want to state on record that I absolutely do not see the Holy Ghost as the Mother in Heaven, for very specific reasons, one namely being that the presidency of three is a male configuration; and the Heavenly Mother is above, beyond, before, encompassing, transcendent of that configuration.  She has her own groove, and it isn't (particularly) the Holy Ghost (in my understanding).

Remember also Moses' wife and son. Who was it circumcised Gershom?

[strappinglad]

I have now read the link. So much Symbolism, so little Thyme. In other words, my original question still needs flavoring.

[rongo]

13 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

One notion is that Israel demythologized  it's literary Canon so as not to allow the old Canaanite elements to continue.  The Canon thus comes to present a mostly "pure" face of aniconic monotheism.  However, archeologically we know that this picture is late and false.  The average Israelite was a polytheist who had idols in his home, and we have inscriptions from the Classical Israelite period which speak of Yahweh and his Asherah.  The Mother Goddess was a staple of the ancient Near East, and Israelite prophets constantly inveighed against the old ways -- even removing the Nehushtan (Brazen Serpent), which had been perfectly acceptable in Moses' time.   It is no accident that Lehi ignores the newly instituted rule that one may not sacrifice outside Jerusalem.  You might want to consult the articles I cited by Peterson, Dever, and Von Feldt.

I know that. My wife and I enjoyed a display at a museum in Salt Lake years ago dealing with ancient Israel. We found it interesting that zillions of household idols have been found in homes of everyday Israelites during the time the prophets were railing against them. 

I still don't think that, this being the case, Wisdom being referred to using female pronouns in Wisdom literature must mean that it is a dog whistle/code for "the divine feminine," Heavenly Mother, etc. I think it is natural across all cultures to personify abstract concepts as male or female just as an instinct --- not as a denotation of literal gender of the pantheon or as direct personal references. 

Last week in my German 1 classes, in introducing grammatical gender and learning vocabulary, I pointed out that the days of the week, and the months are all masculine. I shared a saying I heard on my mission from people, referring to the unpredictable weather in April (similar to our "March comes in like a lion, and goes out like a lamb"): Der April, der April ---- der macht was er will (April, April ---- he does what he wants). 

[Robert F. Smith]

24 minutes ago, rongo said:

I know that. My wife and I enjoyed a display at a museum in Salt Lake years ago dealing with ancient Israel. We found it interesting that zillions of household idols have been found in homes of everyday Israelites during the time the prophets were railing against them. 

I still don't think that, this being the case, Wisdom being referred to using female pronouns in Wisdom literature must mean that it is a dog whistle/code for "the divine feminine," Heavenly Mother, etc. I think it is natural across all cultures to personify abstract concepts as male or female just as an instinct --- not as a denotation of literal gender of the pantheon or as direct personal references. 

Last week in my German 1 classes, in introducing grammatical gender and learning vocabulary, I pointed out that the days of the week, and the months are all masculine. I shared a saying I heard on my mission from people, referring to the unpredictable weather in April (similar to our "March comes in like a lion, and goes out like a lamb"): Der April, der April ---- der macht was er will (April, April ---- he does what he wants). 

It is helpful to think of Israel in the context of other, nearby cultures.  That the personification might have been more than just ornamentation (metaphor) can be seen from rerference to Sophia "Wisdom" alone.  As for the English and German weekday names, there is a pagan substrate which lingers on.

[JulieM]

17 hours ago, USU78 said:

I will be delighted to have you participate substantively. Any thoughts? Did you have a chance to read the linked transcript?

Thanks USU78!  I didn't have much time yesterday, but will try to take a look at your link today 

[RevTestament]

20 hours ago, USU78 said:

At the FAIR Mormon conference a couple of years ago, the following was presented:  https://www.fairmormon.org/conference/august-2015/the-mother-in-heaven-and-her-children

This commentary was particularly striking:

So, here we have the Heavenly Mother being presented as a Maker Who wraps us up in a priestly garment woven by her. 

Her role in creation and in the life of Israel is hidden, however, in apocrypha like Ben Sira or in Proverbs and Psalms (as well as elsewhere).

The discussion in the linked address on deliberate changes in the Tanakh, like, for example, the switching of an aleph for an ayin [both of which are rough equivalents for "A"], in order to obscure original intent, is especially interesting given JSJr's reference of a deliberate change to Genesis 1:1 [King Follett Discourse] and the BoM's first book's repeated mention of the removal of "plain and precious" things from scipture [Nephi 13:26,28-29,32,34-35,40]. 

What I find most interesting, however, is the representation of the Mother as creatrix.  What exactly is meant symbolically and ritually by Her weaving and providing priestly vestments for the king and/or initiate will no doubt be a matter for some considerable debate.  In any event, we know from scripture, especially LDS scripture, that both Father and Son are creators, and that is both part of what they are, as well as what they do.  How else should we expect the Heavenly Mother to act and be, other than as engaged in the creative process, represented by weaving in the above references.

I would love some input from those not of the LDS persuasion on especially Psalm 2:6's mistranslation of nasakh "to weave" and the implicit reference to the Great Weaver.

Like Robert, i don't read heavenly mother into this language, unless you take Yeshua or Heavenly Father as our Heavenly Mother. In several places the scriptures El Shaddai paints Himself as one who nurses us to perfection or to adulthood when we can eat meat. This is much like growing in wisdom which is personified as a female.

Genesis 49:25

25 Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee; and by the ^aAlmighty/El Shaddai, who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the ^bwomb:

Isaiah 28:9

9 ¶ Whom shall he teach ^aknowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are^bweaned from the ^cmilk, and drawn from the breasts.

Hebrews 5:12

12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of ^amilk, and not of strong meat.

[clarkgoble]

2 hours ago, rongo said:

I still don't think that, this being the case, Wisdom being referred to using female pronouns in Wisdom literature must mean that it is a dog whistle/code for "the divine feminine," Heavenly Mother, etc. I think it is natural across all cultures to personify abstract concepts as male or female just as an instinct --- not as a denotation of literal gender of the pantheon or as direct personal references. 

Typically the arguments are stronger than that. There's compelling reasons to think pre-exilic Israel had more in common with Canaanite pantheons. To the point that really isn't a controversial view but is the dominant view among scholars. From a theological perspective separating out false views from true views is tricky. Especially when most of the records we have were compiled in the post-exilic period.

There's really abundant literature on Prov 8. Often the parallels to Egyptian goddess Ma'at who is also wisdom get noted. Among other figures Wisdom is usually one of the feminine pantheon. You also have other Hebrew texts such as Ecclesiasticus 24 or Wisdom of Solomon 6-8 where wisdom is personified (particularly the latter)

Now of course the counter argument is that the author of Prov 8 could have borrowed other poems from the neighbors which arose among such religious views without necessarily embracing such religious views. Heaven knows there's tons of such borrowing throughout the Old Testament. Further any of the examples of a goddess in Hebrew religion can always be argued away as mere syncretistic religion. (See for instance Jeremiah's condmenations of the queen of heaven) So I don't think Prov 8 can be evidence for the theological acceptance of a mother in heaven. Yet, from a Mormon perspective such theology isn't inherently problematic, and that will affect how we read the abundant evidence of the acceptance of a mother in heaven in the pre-exilic times. From our perspective what counts is whether the practices and beliefs are apostate but don't see acceptance of the divine feminine as inherently apostate.

Worth reading (and it touches upon the issue of weaving or at least weavings) is the introduction for the book "The Cult of Asherah in Ancient Israel and Judah"

Edited August 22, 2017 by clarkgoble

[RevTestament]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

It is helpful to think of Israel in the context of other, nearby cultures.  That the personification might have been more than just ornamentation (metaphor) can be seen from rerference to Sophia "Wisdom" alone.  As for the English and German weekday names, there is a pagan substrate which lingers on.

Indeed, Israel comes out of Babylon with the pagan names for their months, which they still use, just like the pagan names in the English calendar - all straight from pagan Rome - and routinely used by Christians of all stripes including LDS.

[RevTestament]

2 hours ago, rongo said:

I know that. My wife and I enjoyed a display at a museum in Salt Lake years ago dealing with ancient Israel. We found it interesting that zillions of household idols have been found in homes of everyday Israelites during the time the prophets were railing against them. 

We have to remember that people had kids, and made toys for them. To archaeologists it seems every figurine is an idol. I don't necessarily agree with that. If the figurine is unclothed it is especially possible that it was simply a doll which kids dressed. It is hard to know whether they actually worshiped all of these stone figurines. Some did have tell-tale signs of being idols of known gods, but to simply assume all figurines were idols I think is dangerous - it would be like some future archaeologist calling G.I. Joe a god. How do we know if they set these figurines up and worshiped them? Are they dressed like gods? I acknowledge that in the north kingdom especially, the people did worship idols, but to automatically assume that all these figurines are idols of worship is a different story.

[USU78]

2 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Typically the arguments are stronger than that. There's compelling reasons to think pre-exilic Israel had more in common with Canaanite pantheons. To the point that really isn't a controversial view but is the dominant view among scholars. From a theological perspective separating out false views from true views is tricky. Especially when most of the records we have were compiled in the post-exilic period.

There's really abundant literature on Prov 8. Often the parallels to Egyptian goddess Ma'at who is also wisdom get noted. Among other figures Wisdom is usually one of the feminine pantheon. You also have other Hebrew texts such as Ecclesiasticus 24 or Wisdom of Solomon 6-8 where wisdom is personified (particularly the latter)

Now of course the counter argument is that the author of Prov 8 could have borrowed other poems from the neighbors which arose among such religious views without necessarily embracing such religious views. Heaven knows there's tons of such borrowing throughout the Old Testament. Further any of the examples of a goddess in Hebrew religion can always be argued away as mere syncretistic religion. (See for instance Jeremiah's condmenations of the queen of heaven) So I don't think Prov 8 can be evidence for the theological acceptance of a mother in heaven. Yet, from a Mormon perspective such theology isn't inherently problematic, and that will affect how we read the abundant evidence of the acceptance of a mother in heaven in the pre-exilic times. From our perspective what counts is whether the practices and beliefs are apostate but don't see acceptance of the divine feminine as inherently apostate.

Worth reading (and it touches upon the issue of weaving or at least weavings) is the introduction for the book "The Cult of Asherah in Ancient Israel and Judah"

That bolded is the issue, as I see it.  Jeremiah could well be railing against an apostate/foreign "Queen of Heaven," while adoring the Virgin Weaver, whose adoration was soaked in right down to the bone, the Josiahan Reformation notwithstanding.  My recollection is that Jeremiah has been demonstrated not to be consistent on the point of excoriation of the Queen of Heaven, and perhaps this accounts for it.

I'm hardly broadly read here, but I've read a few things, like here, for example:  http://www.wtl.us.edu.pl/ssht/39,1/SSHT_39,1(2006)25-33.pdf, which casts serious doubts about Jeremiah's approval of the reported reforms under Josiah.  Jeremiah's apparent acceptance wholesale of the "Book of the Law," presumably Deuteronomy, as a unifying force in bringing all Israel and Judah back to true worship [new worship?] begs, it appears to me, a lot of questions.  The first big question would be:  what did the "Book of the Law" look like when Huldah trotted it out?  And how does that bear on our views of a non-apostate, non-foreign, weaving Virgin Queen of Heaven?  To get at her, we need to blast a way through that wall, as well as the "what parts of Jeremiah are untouched by tendentious Deuteronomic editors and are, therefore, reliable Word of G-d" wall.

Edited August 22, 2017 by USU78

[clarkgoble]

31 minutes ago, USU78 said:

I'm hardly broadly read here, but I've read a few things, like here, for example:  http://www.wtl.us.edu.pl/ssht/39,1/SSHT_39,1(2006)25-33.pdf, which casts serious doubts about Jeremiah's approval of the reported reforms under Josiah.  Jeremiah's apparent acceptance wholesale of the "Book of the Law," presumably Deuteronomy, as a unifying force in bringing all Israel and Judah back to true worship [new worship?] begs, it appears to me, a lot of questions.  The first big question would be:  what did the "Book of the Law" look like when Huldah trotted it out?  And how does that bear on our views of a non-apostate, non-foreign, weaving Virgin Queen of Heaven?  To get at her, we need to blast a way through that wall, as well as the "what parts of Jeremiah are untouched by tendentious Deuteronomic editors and are, therefore, reliable Word of G-d" wall.

I agree that the Jeremiah situation is more complicated than it first appears. However I'd also argue that one of the biggest problems for those arguing "it's all the deuteronomists" is that they really don't grapple well with Jeremiah's texts. (Often appealing to late redaction of Jeremiah) It's why I don't inherently buy Margaret Barker's reconstructions. They're very interesting but I worry we accept her because it's useful for our Book of Mormon project rather than the strength of her justifications in some cases.

Edited August 22, 2017 by clarkgoble

[USU78]

3 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I agree that the Jeremiah situation is more complicated than it first appears. However I'd also argue that one of the biggest problems for those arguing "it's all the deuteronomists" is that they really don't grapple well with Jeremiah's texts. (Often appealing to late redaction of Jeremiah) It's why I don't inherently buy Margaret Barker's reconstructions. They're very interesting but I worry we accept her because it's useful for our Book of Mormon project rather than the strength of her justifications in some cases.

And that's absolutely fair.  We must, for example, reject her conclusion that the Trinity is Father/Mother/Child, rather than Father/Son/Holy Spirit.  But that's a quibble, since the Mormon "trinity" is a quatrain in four-part-harmony, sung by Tenor, Baritone, Bass and Soprano.

USU "No Countertenors or Castrati, please" 78

[mfbukowski]

19 hours ago, Maidservant said:

The garment of the holy priesthood IS the body; and our passage through this earth life IS the holy of holies; so it IS something that mothers deliver to their sons and their daughters every day.

If you have not heard of the Hymn of the Pearl, you MUST read it.  To me, this dates the plan of salvation as we understand it- but in mythic form- to 150-220 BCE.

Remember the East is always the direction of light and life, while the west is connected to Hades, and the Underground.

http://gnosis.org/library/hymnpearl.htm

WAY back several years ago I wrote a commentary on this work on my first attempt at blogging

https://mfbukowski.wordpress.com/hymn-of-the-soul-proto-mormon-gnostic-text/

[USU78]

19 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

If you have not heard of the Hymn of the Pearl, you MUST read it.  To me, this dates the plan of salvation as we understand it- but in mythic form- to 150-220 BCE.

Remember the East is always the direction of light and life, while the west is connected to Hades, and the Underground.

http://gnosis.org/library/hymnpearl.htm

WAY back several years ago I wrote a commentary on this work on my first attempt at blogging

https://mfbukowski.wordpress.com/hymn-of-the-soul-proto-mormon-gnostic-text/

Several years ago I rendered the Hymn in blankverse. Beautiful stuff.

[hagoth7]

On 8/21/2017 at 1:21 PM, Jeanne said:

Interesting..I hope others will contribute to help my understanding of all of this.  As everyone knows..I kept my Heavenly Mother..I need her.  I am hoping that she was very much in the process of our creation...but not at sewing machine.  Which is why I hope you can expand and explain what the deeper meaning of all of this may mean.  I have never been through the Temple...but as a Mother in Heaven, surely, she was very much involved.  I wish so much that not just the LDS church....but the world of churches knew more about this.  Go on...I am listening..

Thanks.

The OP brings to mind this idea:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norns

[Bernard Gui]

An interesting sideline....

Quote

According to the Hopi oral tradition, it was Spider Woman who taught the Hopi how to weave cotton in the ancient time. The efforts of the weaver are therefore viewed as a manifestation of the creative power of spirituality. Weaving is not seen as an act in which one creates something by oneself; it is seen as an act in which one uncovers a pattern that was already there. http://nativeamericannetroots.net/diary/1270

Quote

 Spider Woman is ubiquitous throughout the Americas, found among the Maya,  Pueblo and Navajo  mythology,  and  among the pre-historic "Mound builders", the  Mississippian cultures as well.  There is evidence that the earliest Spider Woman was found among the Maya, where she is identified as the Earth Mother.    I find this ancient myth a profound metaphor for our time,  a symbol that   can encompass ecology, community, theology, integral conciousness studies, and quantum physics.    

In his book on Hopi religion, anthropologist John Loftin writes that: 

“Spider Woman was the first to weave.  Her techniques and patterns have stood the test of time, or more properly, the test of timelessness – because they have always been present.  It makes sense that one would follow the instructions of a deity who helped form the underlying structure of the world in which one lives...........Weaving is not an act in which one creates something oneself – it is an act in which one uncovers a pattern that was already there.” 

Pueblo peoples also called Spider Woman “Thought Woman”,  a creatrix, usually told in union with Tewa the Sun God, who spun the world into being  with what she imagined, with the stories she told that became manifest.  From her very being, the Spider  spins silken, transparent threads that she organizes into the patterned symmetry of an ever-expanding Web.   Tse Che Nako weaves, sharing this precious  creative power with all of her Relations....

http://www.laurenraine.com/spider-woman.

 

[USU78]

4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

An interesting sideline....

 

Wow! Great find. Time to break out Book of the Hopi again. Wasn't Spider Woman the mother of the G-d of the land?

Edited August 25, 2017 by USU78

[Bernard Gui]

On 8/25/2017 at 6:24 AM, USU78 said:

Wow! Great find. Time to break out Book of the Hopi again. Wasn't Spider Woman the mother of the G-d of the land?

I'll have to check. I used the Hopi rather than the Navajo myth because it's older. The Navajo learned it from them.

Edited August 28, 2017 by Bernard Gui