oops Women

[DJBrown]

8 hours ago, ALarson said:

I think it's great that you have worked through this together.  However, that does not change the fact that men and women are not treated as equals in the temple.  Pay close attention to the wording next time  and you'll understand more of what we are referring to here.  (You may have already done that and have been able to justify it or have accepted it some how and that's fine too if you have.)  

Your perception is that men and women are not treated as equals.  They are different.  There really is no argument about that.  But they are absolutely equal in the site of God and in the temple ordinances.  

Elder Ballard made a comment once in a meeting about the difference in the endowment for men and women, and it changed everything for me (and my wife).  I DID listen to the words very closely the next time I did a session and noticed a very subtle but very important difference.  

I just returned from the temple about an hour ago.  I noticed something else that I had never thought about regarding Eve and the wording of the ordinance.  Motherhood and womanhood are glorified and exalted in the endowment if we will but open our eyes to see it.  We just have to get beyond our generational, feminist sensitivities.  And I don't say that in a condescending tone.  We are all so effected by so many influences in our world.  It can be extremely difficult to see things clearly.  I know that my perspective is considerably clouded by the way society and culture have influenced my way of thinking (in addition to my own intellectual and spiritual limitations).

[Calm]

"Elder Ballard made a comment once in a meeting about the difference in the endowment for men and women, and it changed everything for me (and my wife)."

Perhaps you could share it.

[DJBrown]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

"Elder Ballard made a comment once in a meeting about the difference in the endowment for men and women, and it changed everything for me (and my wife)."

Perhaps you could share it.

It was a simple statement about the difference in accountability at the beginning of the endowment.  

[Kenngo1969]

Women are pronounced something.  Men are pronounced that they may become something.  'Nuff Said!  

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Makes me think it might have something to do with polygamy in the next life if they don't want women to know. But that's what I do when I don't get the facts up front, start guessing. 

I think that guessing when we don't know something is a normal thing to do, but I think it's better not to assume the worst case scenario if we have no evidence to support it.  That doesn't seem very fair.  

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, DJBrown said:

It was a simple statement about the difference in accountability at the beginning of the endowment.  

Which gender was held to the higher accountability?

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

Which gender was held to the higher accountability?

I have to watch what I say here.  There are 1,000 ways I can get into trouble, and only one or two to stay out of it.    Accountability is probably the wrong word (and remember, it wasn't my word), but I can't think of a better way to describe it. Again,  Sisters are pronounced something, Brethren are pronounced that they may become something.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I have to watch what I say here.  There are 1,000 ways I can get into trouble, and only one or two to stay out of it.    Accountability is probably the wrong word (and remember, it wasn't my word), but I can't think of a better way to describe it. Again,  Sisters are pronounced something, Brethren are pronounced that they may become something.

So we just a free pass because we are female?  

I don't really understand what that means. No endowed women in the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms?  All endowed women automatically get celestial?

[Kenngo1969]

I'll bow out.  Thanks.  

[Buckeye]

8 hours ago, bluebell said:

So we just a free pass because we are female?  

I don't really understand what that means. No endowed women in the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms?  All endowed women automatically get celestial?

Not a free pass but certainly less accountability. In the heirarchy, men are closer to god and his level of accountability. Women are closer to children and their level of accountability. 

[Rain]

21 hours ago, bluebell said:

I'm sure it's not, and I never meant to imply that the women are treated differently in that regard.  But I do think that each gender would benefit from understanding how their Heavenly Father views the other gender, and what He expects of them.  

My good friend was dealing with some bad choices of her husband last year, and was really feeling unloved by God, specifically as a woman (because it seemed like the consequences that she was experiencing due to his sins were worse than his consequences).  She was struggling.  Her bishop told her that he wished she could hear the initiatory blessings for the men so that she could know of the special blessings that are offered to women that aren't offered to men.  He thought it would really help her.

But, there was no way for her to legitimately find out what he was talking about.  She didn't have the women's blessings memorized and knew of no man that did either so that they could compare while in the temple.  When she asked if someone could share them with her, like if she could talk to the temple president about it, she was told that it wasn't even appropriate for her to ask to know what the men's blessings were.  

Why?  Why the secrecy on those blessings when we are in the temple?

I'm sad that happened with her.  

I found out several years ago when we had a stake temple night and the temple president spoke to us and told us there was a difference and he encouraged us to share the differences when,  as husband and wife, we were together in the celestial room.  Now that leaves out those who come alone  to the temple for whatever reason, but it is a step in the right direction.  It would be nice for all temple presidents to be comfortable with this idea. 

 

[ALarson]

14 hours ago, DJBrown said:

Your perception is that men and women are not treated as equals.  They are different.  There really is no argument about that.  But they are absolutely equal in the site of God and in the temple ordinances.  

Elder Ballard made a comment once in a meeting about the difference in the endowment for men and women, and it changed everything for me (and my wife).  I DID listen to the words very closely the next time I did a session and noticed a very subtle but very important difference.  

Can you be more specific regarding Elder Ballard's comment?  I'd really love to hear what he stated.

I agree that the difference is "subtle" and many miss it until they really start listening very closely and analyzing and understanding.  But, you just saying that men and women are treated equally does not make it so.  They are simply not treated the same in the temple.  You can come to be ok with that (as you and your wife have done) and try to understand why it is, but that changes nothing about that fact.

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I'll bow out.  Thanks.  

I hope you know i'm not trying to argue or be contentious.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Buckeye said:

Not a free pass but certainly less accountability. In the heirarchy, men are closer to god and his level of accountability. Women are closer to children and their level of accountability. 

I'm sure that there have been men in the past who have believed that, but I really hope it's not something that anyone is perpetuating in this day and age.  It's so condescending.  Plus, there is no way for a man and woman to be equal if they have a parent/child type of relationship.  

[Kenngo1969]

12 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I have to watch what I say here.  There are 1,000 ways I can get into trouble, and only one or two to stay out of it.    Accountability is probably the wrong word (and remember, it wasn't my word), but I can't think of a better way to describe it. Again,  Sisters are pronounced something, Brethren are pronounced that they may become something.

 

10 hours ago, bluebell said:

So we just a free pass because we are female?  

I don't really understand what that means. No endowed women in the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms?  All endowed women automatically get celestial?

 

3 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I'll bow out.  Thanks.  

 

42 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I hope you know i'm not trying to argue or be contentious.

Yes, I know.

[DJBrown]

11 hours ago, bluebell said:

So we just a free pass because we are female?  

I don't really understand what that means. No endowed women in the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms?  All endowed women automatically get celestial?

Here is a thought experiment:

Which gender is most responsible for the bloodshed and warfare and conflict throughout the generations since Adam and Eve?

Which gender is most responsible for the breakup of families and infidelity?

Although the pattern is changing with the second question (women have caught up with men in being unfaithful), the answer to both is clearly men.  Now I do not pretend to claim that men are less righteous than women or anything like that- such a claim has always bothered me.  But men's weaknesses and sins are manifested in a way that is different than the weaknesses and sins of women.  And can you think of any other two manifestations of sin that translate into more suffering than war and infidelity?  I can't.  

It is this phenomenon or reality which makes men accountable in a way that is different than the way women are made accountable.  And it is my opinion that it is reflected in the Priesthood ordinances.

Another point about the events in the garden- many people get caught up in what they perceive as the 'punishments' received by Adam and Eve for partaking of the fruit.  (This is found in the scriptures, so will reference it in this way).  Instead of thinking about Eve as the lesser sex or the one who was weaker and who partook of the fruit first, I believe their behavior in the garden was a function of their personalities and gender.  In other words, it wasn't necessarily a weakness within Eve that resulted in her partaking of the fruit.  Rather, I believe it was one of her strengths as a women that made her interested in the person doing the tempting that differentiated her from Adam.  I believe it was this openness and interest in personal connection and the welfare of another that created a situation allowing her to see a greater perspective and context for partaking the fruit.  Her womanly wisdom was a key factor in mankind's progress.  If Adam and Eve were placed in the garden 100 times, the outcome would be the same.  Eve would partake of the fruit first.  And that is a good think.

Ultimately, men and women are simply different.  Not in ways that make one gender better or worse than another.  And in God's wisdom, the path of discipleship for both are very similar, but also tailored for the strengths and weakness of each gender.  

[Calm]

2 hours ago, DJBrown said:

Here is a thought experiment:

Which gender is most responsible for the bloodshed and warfare and conflict throughout the generations since Adam and Eve?

Which gender is most responsible for the breakup of families and infidelity?

Although the pattern is changing with the second question (women have caught up with men in being unfaithful), the answer to both is clearly men.  Now I do not pretend to claim that men are less righteous than women or anything like that- such a claim has always bothered me.  But men's weaknesses and sins are manifested in a way that is different than the weaknesses and sins of women.  And can you think of any other two manifestations of sin that translate into more suffering than war and infidelity?  I can't.  

It is this phenomenon or reality which makes men accountable in a way that is different than the way women are made accountable.  And it is my opinion that it is reflected in the Priesthood ordinances..  

But why would an individual be held accountable for what others of his gender were like, especially when the probability is the majority of men over the eons have been peaceful and committed to their families (or humanity would no longer exist)?

That would be like treating Russians as if everyone of them was a Putin or Stalin.

And if the pattern is changing with infidelity, then it is a behaviour based on circumstance and opportunity rather than a gender trait.  Menwould be faithful as well if the cost of infidelity was as high for them as it had been for women.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I'm sure that there have been men in the past who have believed that, but I really hope it's not something that anyone is perpetuating in this day and age.  It's so condescending.  Plus, there is no way for a man and woman to be equal if they have a parent/child type of relationship.  

The only thing I can think of currently that makes this make sense perhaps is it is addressing current opportunity, but is not excluding future.  For example, we teach children become accountable as they get older and we assume that those who die as children will have the opportunity to grow and marry and have children of their own, that those who lack the opportunity to hear the gospel will hear it in the next life, etc.  We don't know how this will be done, but there does not appear to be a removal of the ability to choose sin or at least distancing oneself from God.  Even if the Millenium (which appears to be the time when all things needed to progress is provided) is peaceful, etc., we are not taught there will be no sin or at least no error or choice to stand apart from the Lord since we teach that not all there will choose to be members of God's Kingdom and that Satan will be loosed at the end to do whatever he will do (which is likely the same thing he has been doing from the beginning, trying to persuade people to see things his way and reject God as their Redeemer).

Lack of accountability ties into lack of blessings, it seems to me, until accountability is given...those who are not held accountable because they have not heard the gospel will become accountable when they are taught in the Spirit World where they will have to deal with the consequence of their choice of how much they choose to accept the Gospel into their lives.

Does the language allow for a time to come when women will be given this same level of accountability and thus the opportunity for the blessings that are tied to these choices and their consequences?

If so, then it could be being Priestess to her husband is only a step on the way to being Priestess to God and this role is needed to provide the opportunities that men currently have through the Priesthood. 

However, unless we can identify where men have held the role of Priest of their wives in some sense, then it is not a comparable progression so even if the above is accurate, it leaves a huge gap for why this would be needed.

All of that aside, accountability is a blessing and needed in order to progress.  It is not some great thing to be told we are less accountable.  It is not a free pass, but rather a delay in progression such as occurs for those who are not accountable for Temple covenants because they have not had the chance for making those covenants and thus cannot receive the blessings linked to the covenants...until they do.

Edited September 17, 2017 by Calm

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

The only thing I can think of currently that makes this make sense perhaps is it is addressing current opportunity, but is not excluding future.  For example, we teach children become accountable as they get older and we assume that those who die as children will have the opportunity to grow and marry and have children of their own, that those who lack the opportunity to hear the gospel will hear it in the next life, etc.  We don't know how this will be done, but there does not appear to be a removal of the ability to choose sin or at least distancing oneself from God.  Even if the Millenium (which appears to be the time when all things needed to progress is provided) is peaceful, etc., we are not taught there will be no sin or at least no error or choice to stand apart from the Lord since we teach that not all there will choose to be members of God's Kingdom and that Satan will be loosed at the end to do whatever he will do (which is likely the same thing he has been doing from the beginning, trying to persuade people to see things his way and reject God as their Redeemer).

Lack of accountability ties into lack of blessings, it seems to me, until accountability is given...those who are not held accountable because they have not heard the gospel will become accountable when they are taught in the Spirit World where they will have to deal with the consequence of their choice of how much they choose to accept the Gospel into their lives.

Does the language allow for a time to come when women will be given this same level of accountability and thus the opportunity for the blessings that are tied to these choices and their consequences?

If so, then it could be being Priestess to her husband is only a step on the way to being Priestess to God and this role is needed to provide the opportunities that men currently have through the Priesthood. 

However, unless we can identify where men have held the role of Priest of their wives in some sense, then it is not a comparable progression so even if the above is accurate, it leaves a huge gap for why this would be needed.

All of that aside, accountability is a blessing and needed in order to progress.  It is not some great thing to be told we are less accountable.  It is not a free pass, but rather a delay in progression such as occurs for those who are not accountable for Temple covenants because they have not had the chance for making those covenants and thus cannot receive the blessings linked to the covenants...until they do.

The idea reminds me of before we had children and weren't sure I was going to be able to have them and people would share all the reasons why I didn't want them - late nights, changing diapers etc. In other words, "you don't want a baby because you don't want the responsibility or accountability."

Now I'm not hoping or wanting what the men have, but I really am wanting to know more about what Heavenly Father wants for me as a woman. I'd like the accountability that goes along with God's confidence in me.

[bluebell]

4 hours ago, DJBrown said:

Here is a thought experiment:

Which gender is most responsible for the bloodshed and warfare and conflict throughout the generations since Adam and Eve?

Which gender is most responsible for the breakup of families and infidelity?

Although the pattern is changing with the second question (women have caught up with men in being unfaithful), the answer to both is clearly men.  Now I do not pretend to claim that men are less righteous than women or anything like that- such a claim has always bothered me.  But men's weaknesses and sins are manifested in a way that is different than the weaknesses and sins of women.  And can you think of any other two manifestations of sin that translate into more suffering than war and infidelity?  I can't.  

It is this phenomenon or reality which makes men accountable in a way that is different than the way women are made accountable.  And it is my opinion that it is reflected in the Priesthood ordinances.

Another point about the events in the garden- many people get caught up in what they perceive as the 'punishments' received by Adam and Eve for partaking of the fruit.  (This is found in the scriptures, so will reference it in this way).  Instead of thinking about Eve as the lesser sex or the one who was weaker and who partook of the fruit first, I believe their behavior in the garden was a function of their personalities and gender.  In other words, it wasn't necessarily a weakness within Eve that resulted in her partaking of the fruit.  Rather, I believe it was one of her strengths as a women that made her interested in the person doing the tempting that differentiated her from Adam.  I believe it was this openness and interest in personal connection and the welfare of another that created a situation allowing her to see a greater perspective and context for partaking the fruit.  Her womanly wisdom was a key factor in mankind's progress.  If Adam and Eve were placed in the garden 100 times, the outcome would be the same.  Eve would partake of the fruit first.  And that is a good think.

Ultimately, men and women are simply different.  Not in ways that make one gender better or worse than another.  And in God's wisdom, the path of discipleship for both are very similar, but also tailored for the strengths and weakness of each gender.  

Help me understand what you are saying better.

I've always been taught that salvation doesn't work like that.  It's not a group thing, right?  It's very personal and individual and one-on-one.  What everyone else has done or is doing doesn't matter.  It's what we have done and what we are doing that counts.  It's also doctrine in the church that we can't be punished for other people's sins or saved because of other people's righteousness (except Christ's).

So how can a man be held more accountable because of the sins of other men?  And how can women be held less accountable because of the righteousness of other women?

And what does all of that have to do with woman's separation from God as taught in the temple?  How does that, and what you are saying above, impact each other?  I sincerely don't understand but I appreciate you sharing your thoughts on this. 

[juliann]

5 hours ago, DJBrown said:

 

Ultimately, men and women are simply different.  Not in ways that make one gender better or worse than another.  And in God's wisdom, the path of discipleship for both are very similar, but also tailored for the strengths and weakness of each gender.  

It isn't a matter of better or worse, it is a matter of visibility and opportunity. If men really believed that women were equal partners they would be in every decision making body in equal numbers so that "difference" was represented. The church is still trying to catch up with this and make corrections...and has a long way to go, just like the rest of the world. 

We are not so much different as we are concerned about different things. Politically, women are going to go for laws advantageous to community and children, men are more concerned about finances. But gender does not mean our sex. It refers to socially constructed characteristics assigned to sex. If girls weren't taught they like pink, most of them would prefer the same colors as boys. And so on. So what you really mean is sex, not gender. That needs to be fixed in the Proc, too.  The church is very gendered. One of the consequences of that, along with ideas that women aren't as accountable, is that men can and should speak for them. (On this forum, speaking for an absent wife doesn't go over well with some of us.)

What I am leading to is that you, as a man, may not be in a position to tell women what they should experience as a woman going through the temple. I'd love to hear about your experiences...but from the limits of your experience. I would be careful in assuming that you know what a woman's path to discipleship is, or what her weaknesses might be. We are not a herd even though we do identify with one another because of our female experience. This demand that we be the voices for our own experience is, in fact, one of the few things that will instantly bring almost all the women here together, critic and defender. 

 

[DJBrown]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

But why would an individual be held accountable for what others of his gender were like, especially when the probability is the majority of men over the eons have been peaceful and committed to their families (or humanity would no longer exist)?

That would be like treating Russians as if everyone of them was a Putin or Stalin.

And if the pattern is changing with infidelity, then it is a behaviour based on circumstance and opportunity rather than a gender trait.  Menwould be faithful as well if the cost of infidelity was as high for them as it had been for women.

The idea is that each individual makes some contribution to the world.  If our contribution is negative, we are held responsible for that.  The ripple effect of our actions and words go beyond what we typically recognize.  There are some good and some bad things that happen in the world.  And if we put out negative things into the world, we will held responsible.  

We are not held responsible for other's actions.  But we are responsible for our own words and actions and the influence of those words and actions.  

Some would argue that the feminist movement has focused more on women becoming like men than being free to be truly feminine beings.  And the argument would therefore suggest that women catching up to men in the infidelity matter is a consequence of women becoming more like men rather than a true reflection of feminine instinct.  I have no idea if that is true.  But it is a possibility that your response does not account for.

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, DJBrown said:

The idea is that each individual makes some contribution to the world.  If our contribution is negative, we are held responsible for that.  The ripple effect of our actions and words go beyond what we typically recognize.  There are some good and some bad things that happen in the world.  And if we put out negative things into the world, we will held responsible.  

We are not held responsible for other's actions.  But we are responsible for our own words and actions and the influence of those words and actions.

If you are suggesting that it is not that women aren't accountable in an area where a man is and instead we are held accountable for different things...there will be areas where a man is not accountable when a woman is, I am opened to the idea and would be interested to hear examples of both.

[DJBrown]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

Help me understand what you are saying better.

I've always been taught that salvation doesn't work like that.  It's not a group thing, right?  It's very personal and individual and one-on-one.  What everyone else has done or is doing doesn't matter.  It's what we have done and what we are doing that counts.  It's also doctrine in the church that we can't be punished for other people's sins or saved because of other people's righteousness (except Christ's).

So how can a man be held more accountable because of the sins of other men?  And how can women be held less accountable because of the righteousness of other women?

And what does all of that have to do with woman's separation from God as taught in the temple?  How does that, and what you are saying above, impact each other?  I sincerely don't understand but I appreciate you sharing your thoughts on this. 

Men have traditionally been the ones who work outside the home to make a living or to make their way in the world.  Men's influence in the world is both a result of their different nature from women and the source or place of impact on that influence.  In the history of the world, what percentage of the various heads of state have been men?  Probably pretty close to 99.9%.  When competing tribes are in conflict- who are the one's who go and settle things?  The men.  (They likely started the conflict too).  

The bottom line from my perspective is that the influence each of us has is something we will be accountable for at judgement.  And looking through history, men's influence on society and family is different than that of women.  And men will bare a different accountability accordingly.  The men of Noah's day have a certain accountability for the suffering of the people of that time.  The women do too, of course.  But I believe it is just a little different.  Now if a man living in Noah's day was righteous and tried his best to uphold goodness and virtue, he would NOT be held responsible like those who jumped on the sin and destruction bandwagon.  Make sense?  It really is just another reminder to us to be careful about what we do and say and our influence on other people.  

Does this help at all?

[Calm]

30 minutes ago, DJBrown said:

Some would argue that the feminist movement has focused more on women becoming like men than being free to be truly feminine beings.  And the argument would therefore suggest that women catching up to men in the infidelity matter is a consequence of women becoming more like men rather than a true reflection of feminine instinct.  I have no idea if that is true.  But it is a possibility that your response does not account for.

Doesn't really matter if women are as naturally prone to infidelity as men are and thus if in the same circumstances will commit it.  It makes no sense to speak of some feminine instinct against infidelity if women are actually going out and being unfaithful.  If it is culture forcing women to be unfaithful because of expectations and therefore they are not accountable for that choice, then the same identical thing can be said about men, so they are accountable for their actions in the same way.  Women might be less prone as a group to infidelity, but that doesn't mean they aren't accountable when they commit infidelity or somehow get the blessings that are tied to chastity if they do not make an active choice to be chaste.

Accountability is about whether one can make a valid choice or not, be responsible for their own behaviour. 

It is also about having the choices to begin with.

Blessings are predicated on having choice.  Without choice, we cannot receive many blessings.  I would say "any" save we all receive resurrection....but that is also based on a choice made before this life, so I guess it is "any blessings"...just like it says in D&C 130.

If women (or a man) are never given the chance to exercise power, they can never receive the blessings that come through self control of the vices that come with power as well as the expansion of abilities that come through exercising the virtues of power.

If a woman or man is never given the chance to marry, they can never experience the blessings that come from eternal marriage.  That is why we believe all will have the chance eventually.  Same with temple ordinances.

So why not all the other choices that are coupled with blessings available?  Why would God limit any blessing only to men, saying women don't need it?  What blessing is there out there that women wouldn't benefit from having?

"20 There is a ^alaw, irrevocably decreed in ^bheaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all ^cblessingsare predicated—

21 And when we obtain any ^ablessing from God, it is by ^bobedience to that law upon which it is predicated."

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/130.18-19

God can't give out free passes to only some people by his own law.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Calm