Revelation on Heavenly Mother

[Robert F. Smith]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

It doesn’t make me angry even if it makes me annoyed and frustrated…frustrated because I have encountered too many women who struggle to find themselves in scripture and revelation and much of the temple endowment in anything but a currently silent sidekick role, including having an eternal female role model.  Being told it is obvious is dismissive of their struggles and pain. If it was so obvious, I don’t believe I would be seeing so many. I think of all the likely silent women as well out there that never speak up because they have seen such comments and either fear being seen as disbelieving…because if it is obvious, only someone malicious would say they couldn’t see it or that they are listening to apostates or fear they will be treated like they were spiritually immature or stupid.

That Heavenly Mother is in fact a solid feature of LDS theology, doesn't help women feel it in a transactional sense, because (as Gertrude Stein said of my birthplace) "there's no there there."  It would help if there were stories and ordinances which explicitly dealt with that aspect of our theology.  What would it mean, for example, if the Relief Society were again to fully function the same way it did under Emma -- having been authorized by Joseph Jr.  Does anyone even imagine what that might mean?

For ancient Israelites, Ashera held a powerful place in their homes -- while the prophets inveighed against it.  Throughout Mesopotamia, Anatolia, Egypt, and India, the figure of the Great Mother was filled with mythic power -- she was included in wonderful stories and rituals.  Female prophets held important posts from Sumer to Delphi.  That doesn't mean that it was right and proper, only that it was a major influence everywhere.

Read Robert Graves, The White Goddess: a Historical Grammar of Poetic Myth, 2nd ed. (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2013).

9 hours ago, Calm said:

 In tutoring math over the decades, I have found one of the easiest way to set off a math block, make it actually harder rather than relax the student is to tell them it is easy, obvious as that instantly shifts them into anxiety mode fearing if they don’t immediately figure it out, that means they are stupid.  And that makes it very hard for them to focus on what they are learning rather how they are feeling.  Even smart kids have that reaction, sometimes they are highly sensitive about such things as they know they are expected to learn quickly and don’t want to disappoint.......................

I was never any good at math, until I actually tackled it.  I knew I needed math skills, and college math was required.  So I spent a year relearning math without pressure:  My community college library had a computerized math program which took the student from third grade basics to college algebra level.  I would go regularly to that library and do a lesson or two.  The program would not allow me to advance until I demonstrated understanding of the operations -- I got regular tests.  When I mastered a section, the computer praised me.    Only I knew I was doing this, so no pressure.

After that course, thinking I might go into teaching, I took the California Basic Educational Skills Test (CBEST) required for all prospective teachers.  I was surprised at how easy the math section of the test was.  When I finished, everyone else was still busy.  In a later college math class, the teacher told us that the secret to mastering math was to do a lot of math.  Get accustomed to it.  It also helped that the math text we used in that class was fun.

[CV75]

8 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That Heavenly Mother is in fact a solid feature of LDS theology, doesn't help women feel it in a transactional sense, because (as Gertrude Stein said of my birthplace) "there's no there there."  It would help if there were stories and ordinances which explicitly dealt with that aspect of our theology.  What would it mean, for example, if the Relief Society were again to fully function the same way it did under Emma -- having been authorized by Joseph Jr.  Does anyone even imagine what that might mean?

For ancient Israelites, Ashera held a powerful place in their homes -- while the prophets inveighed against it.  Throughout Mesopotamia, Anatolia, Egypt, and India, the figure of the Great Mother was filled with mythic power -- she was included in wonderful stories and rituals.  Female prophets held important posts from Sumer to Delphi.  That doesn't mean that it was right and proper, only that it was a major influence everywhere.

Read Robert Graves, The White Goddess: a Historical Grammar of Poetic Myth, 2nd ed. (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2013).

I was never any good at math, until I actually tackled it.  I knew I needed math skills, and college math was required.  So I spent a year relearning math without pressure:  My community college library had a computerized math program which took the student from third grade basics to college algebra level.  I would go regularly to that library and do a lesson or two.  The program would not allow me to advance until I demonstrated understanding of the operations -- I got regular tests.  When I mastered a section, the computer praised me.    Only I knew I was doing this, so no pressure.

After that course, thinking I might go into teaching, I took the California Basic Educational Skills Test (CBEST) required for all prospective teachers.  I was surprised at how easy the math section of the test was.  When I finished, everyone else was still busy.  In a later college math class, the teacher told us that the secret to mastering math was to do a lot of math.  Get accustomed to it.  It also helped that the math text we used in that class was fun.

I was reminded that our former poster Ahab's writing style was very similar to that of Gertrude Stein. A sample:

"It is a funny thing about addresses where you live. When you live there you know it so well that it is like an identity a thing that is so much a thing that it could not ever be any other thing and then you live somewhere else and years later, the address that was so much an address that it was like your name and you said it as if it was not an address but something that was living and then years after you do not know what the address was and when you say it is not a name anymore but something you cannot remember. That is what makes your identity not a thing that exists but something you do or do not remember." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gertrude_Stein

[CA Steve]

If there is a heavenly mother, then does that mean there is a heavenly mother-in-law? Makes one think twice about eternal marriage I suppose.

"Dear, my mother is coming to visit."

"Can you ask her to leave a little quicker this time? I mean, the last time she visited she was here for over 3 million years!"

😜

[Stargazer]

2 hours ago, Nofear said:

I don't know. I thought her comment was pretty self-explanatory, even obvious in nature.

Of course you would!

I guess I'm being rather dense today, then.

[JAHS]

19 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

If there is a heavenly mother, then does that mean there is a heavenly mother-in-law? Makes one think twice about eternal marriage I suppose.

"Dear, my mother is coming to visit."

"Can you ask her to leave a little quicker this time? I mean, the last time she visited she was here for over 3 million years!"

😜

You could create a separate little planet for her to stay on while there. 😉

[Robert F. Smith]

19 minutes ago, JAHS said:

You could create a separate little planet for her to stay on while there. 😉

Does Gordon B. Hinckley have his own planet?

[Stargazer]

33 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Does Gordon B. Hinckley have his own planet?

Perhaps not at the moment. Has he been resurrected yet? Who can say? But I wonder if the Parable of the Talents can be interpreted to mean that after our resurrection in glory we might be assigned to watch over a planet full of other children of God in a far distant solar system (or galaxy)? And as we prove ourselves capable and efficient, we might be given ever more responsible tasks, such as overseeing the evolution of a star system from molecular cloud and ignition of the star, to its eventual evolution into a red dwarf. And then on to watching over all the new stars in a cluster (like the Pleiades), and guiding their evolution. And finally, whole galaxies!! Now that would be exciting!

[CA Steve]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Does Gordon B. Hinckley have his own planet?

Yes he does.

It's called "Mormon" and all the residents are Mormons.

[Calm]

8 hours ago, Nofear said:

Or, if a woman, one could be lucky enough to be a tetrachromat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy).

Fascinating 

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

the teacher told us that the secret to mastering math was to do a lot of math.

The best math teacher I ever had taught us the concept three times.  First time he went through it somewhat fast, second time he went through it in painstaking detail and we did a lot of homework of the basic concept.  Third time he went through it quickly again, but stopping to deal with anyone’s questions.  Homework was fewer problems, but more elaborate to make sure we understood the concept and just hadn’t memorized the formula.  It got boring for me by the end, but that stuff was embedded.

Edited April 12, 2022 by Calm

[The Nehor]

5 hours ago, CA Steve said:

If there is a heavenly mother, then does that mean there is a heavenly mother-in-law? Makes one think twice about eternal marriage I suppose.

"Dear, my mother is coming to visit."

"Can you ask her to leave a little quicker this time? I mean, the last time she visited she was here for over 3 million years!"

😜

Advantage if God only has one wife or you are both born of the same mother is that your mother-in-law could very well be your mom. Hooray for the eternal principle of incest!

Edit: I hope no one ever quotes this out of context.

Edited April 12, 2022 by The Nehor

[Calm]

10 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Advantage if God only has one wife or you are both born of the same mother is that your mother-in-law could very well be your mom. Hooray for the eternal principle of incest!

Edit: I hope no one ever quotes this out of context.

That almost makes me want to do it, but too much effort to remember for an appropriate moment.

[Robert F. Smith]

9 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Perhaps not at the moment. Has he been resurrected yet? Who can say? But I wonder if the Parable of the Talents can be interpreted to mean that after our resurrection in glory we might be assigned to watch over a planet full of other children of God in a far distant solar system (or galaxy)? And as we prove ourselves capable and efficient, we might be given ever more responsible tasks, such as overseeing the evolution of a star system from molecular cloud and ignition of the star, to its eventual evolution into a red dwarf. And then on to watching over all the new stars in a cluster (like the Pleiades), and guiding their evolution. And finally, whole galaxies!! Now that would be exciting!

Yes, and we need to understand the governance of God’s whole system via KOLOB (Abr 3:3, facs 2:1-2).  This may be accomplished via the mechanism of “clumps and strands in a vast ‘cosmic web’” of dark matter and hydrogen gas flowing “along the filaments to feed the growing galaxies.”

Quote

Astronomers have seen how the gravity of the web’s filaments distort the images of more distant galaxies, making them align slightly, like fish swimming in a school. Other scientists have detected huge intergalactic clouds of hydrogen by noting how they absorb light from very distant, bright galaxies called quasars.[1]

The material seems to lie along a connected structure, a vast cosmic web connecting the galaxies.  Such filaments are held together by dark matter, the unknown material thought to make up roughly 80 percent of the universe.  * * * 

As massive galaxies interact with one another, their tidal forces can pull gas out into the region between them.[2]  

Physicist Anton Petrov points out that one way to explain how dark matter holds the galaxies together is via theoretical Weakly Interactive Massive Particles (WIMPS), and various experiments are being conducted in order to find just such a particle.^[3] He also notes recent evidence for a heretofore unknown Fifth Force (X17), having no connection with Dark Matter or Dark Energy.^[4] Whatever the case, Petrov suggests that a cosmic web connects the entire universe.^[5]

---

[1] Adrian Cho, “Astronomers spot the filaments of gas that feed the galaxies,” Science, Oct 3, 2019, online at https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/10/astronomers-map-galaxy-feeding-hydrogen-filaments-first-time .

[2] Nola Taylor Redd, “Giant Gas Clouds Found In Void Between Nearby Galaxies,” Space.com, May 8, 2013, online at https://www.space.com/21027-giant-gas-clouds-nearby-galaxies.html

^[3] Petrov.  “While Looking for Dark Matter, Scientists Discover Something Way Cooler,” What Da Math, May 4, 2019, online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VUMjJJBtuA .  See also Petrov, “The Brightness of Cosmic Web Filament Surprised Scientists,” Mar 16, 2020, online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvOEDQ_34nM .

^[4] Petrov, “Wow, New Mysterious Fifth Force May Have Been Just Confirmed,” What Da Math, Nov 24, 2019, online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6GhM_2_P_g , citing A.J. Krasznahorkay, et al., “New evidence supporting the existence of the hypothetic X17 particle,” Oct 23, 2019, online at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.10459.pdf .

^[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fktj7J7u6GI .

Edited April 12, 2022 by Robert F. Smith

[Stargazer]

8 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and we need to understand the governance of God’s whole system via KOLOB (Abr 3:3, facs 2:1-2).  This may be accomplished via the mechanism of “clumps and strands in a vast ‘cosmic web’” of dark matter and hydrogen gas flowing “along the filaments to feed the growing galaxies.”

Physicist Anton Petrov points out that one way to explain how dark matter holds the galaxies together is via theoretical Weakly Interactive Massive Particles (WIMPS), and various experiments are being conducted in order to find just such a particle.^[3] He also notes recent evidence for a heretofore unknown Fifth Force (X17), having no connection with Dark Matter or Dark Energy.^[4] Whatever the case, Petrov suggests that a cosmic web connects the entire universe.^[5]

---

[1] Adrian Cho, “Astronomers spot the filaments of gas that feed the galaxies,” Science, Oct 3, 2019, online at https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/10/astronomers-map-galaxy-feeding-hydrogen-filaments-first-time .

[2] Nola Taylor Redd, “Giant Gas Clouds Found In Void Between Nearby Galaxies,” Space.com, May 8, 2013, online at https://www.space.com/21027-giant-gas-clouds-nearby-galaxies.html

^[3] Petrov.  “While Looking for Dark Matter, Scientists Discover Something Way Cooler,” What Da Math, May 4, 2019, online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VUMjJJBtuA .  See also Petrov, “The Brightness of Cosmic Web Filament Surprised Scientists,” Mar 16, 2020, online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvOEDQ_34nM .

^[4] Petrov, “Wow, New Mysterious Fifth Force May Have Been Just Confirmed,” What Da Math, Nov 24, 2019, online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6GhM_2_P_g , citing A.J. Krasznahorkay, et al., “New evidence supporting the existence of the hypothetic X17 particle,” Oct 23, 2019, online at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.10459.pdf .

^[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fktj7J7u6GI .

I watch Anton's channel religiously, and have seen all the videos you reference. He's a top-notch science-explainer! But I wasn't aware that he is a physicist! What I mean is "degreed physicist". Anyone who studies physics could theoretically be called a physicist, I suppose. I hold a Certificate of Examination in Physics at the Advanced Level from the Oxford and Cambridge Schools Examination Board, so maybe I'm a physicist as well! That sounds impressive until you realize that it's just AP Physics out of a high school curriculum (to translate it from UK into US terms).

This is what I know about Anton.  He has a Bachelor of Science in Psychology from McGill University, Montreal; and holds a Master of Teaching from the University of Toronto. His certifications are for math and biology at the high school level, and also has certifications for TESL. But based on his obvious awareness of astrophysics as demonstrated on his YouTube channel, I'd be quite willing to call him a physicist. 🙂 

And I agree with Petrov that a cosmic web connects the entire universe.

[Robert F. Smith]

 

[Robert F. Smith]

 

[Robert F. Smith]

 

[mfbukowski]

On 4/9/2022 at 11:09 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

Taylor G. Petrey, “Rethinking Mormonism’s Heavenly Mother,” Harvard Theological Review 109/3 (July 2016): 315-341.  Online at https://www.academia.edu/27103113/Rethinking_Mormonisms_Heavenly_Mother_Harvard_Theological_Review_?email_work_card=view-paper ,

Margaret Barker has pointed out that the Great Isaiah Scroll from the Dead Sea Scrolls includes the reading at Isaiah 7:11, “Ask a sign of the Mother [מאם] of the LORD your God.”[1]

---

[1] Barker, Temple Mysticism, 107.  The MT reads מעם.

 

Re: article speaking of male homogeneity.

Oh my gosh.  

Yes, leave half of humanity out of the class of divinity.  That helps homogeneity?  Seems  bit alienating to me

 

[MiserereNobis]

On 4/9/2022 at 10:45 PM, JLHPROF said:

 

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

They'd have to be blind to ignore it.

We could be wrong, but we're not stupid. It's similar to the doctrine of Trinity. Non-Trinitarians often make fun of the Trinity, as if some tiny detail in the Bible shows that it's obviously false (my favorite: Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father, so there can't be a Trinity).

It's seems they forget that some of the best minds of both Western civilization (and the Christian East) believed and do believe these doctrines. Our doctrines may be wrong, but 2000 years of intelligent theologians are not blind or stupid.

[MiserereNobis]

On 4/11/2022 at 8:11 AM, Stargazer said:

I can understand that, from a certain point of view!

Were the rebellions of Martin Luther and Henry VIII revelations or apostasy? They better not have been the former, because if they were continuing revelation then the framework of the left-behind church is shattered beyond repair. Which Pope would like that? And who would want a new true church every few years, with the prophets John Wesley, John Calvin, and Mary Baker Eddy? 

No, stick to the tried and true, sola scriptura, and all that. There's the safe path! Supposedly.

It was the people who left the Catholic Church who taught sola scriptura. The tried and true was: scripture, tradition, magisterium.

[mfbukowski]

2 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

We could be wrong, but we're not stupid. It's similar to the doctrine of Trinity. Non-Trinitarians often make fun of the Trinity, as if some tiny detail in the Bible shows that it's obviously false (my favorite: Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father, so there can't be a Trinity).

It's seems they forget that some of the best minds of both Western civilization (and the Christian East) believed and do believe these doctrines. Our doctrines may be wrong, but 2000 years of intelligent theologians are not blind or stupid.

Of course not, but they were conditioned by their cultures, just as we are today.

The common aspect here was Christianity as it was understood then

[JLHPROF]

23 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

We could be wrong, but we're not stupid. It's similar to the doctrine of Trinity. Non-Trinitarians often make fun of the Trinity, as if some tiny detail in the Bible shows that it's obviously false (my favorite: Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father, so there can't be a Trinity).

It's seems they forget that some of the best minds of both Western civilization (and the Christian East) believed and do believe these doctrines. Our doctrines may be wrong, but 2000 years of intelligent theologians are not blind or stupid.

Nobody is questioning intelligence, just whether inconvenient scriptures are acknowledged, ignored, or create a less literal explanation.

This scripture clearly states that God (specifically Eloheim - a plural word) created male and female in their image.

We either acknowledge that, ignore that, or explain it another way.

The Catholic Church can believe whatever it wants about the verse but it says what it says.

Edited April 17, 2022 by JLHPROF

[halconero]

20 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Nobody is questioning intelligence, just whether inconvenient scriptures are acknowledged, ignored, or create a less literal explanation.

This scripture clearly states that God (specifically Eloheim - a plural word) created male and female in their image.

We either acknowledge that, ignore that, or explain it another way.

The Catholic Church can believe whatever it wants about the verse but it says what it says.

There have been some interesting attempts to fit strict monotheism to those verses over the course of Rabbinic Judaism and Christian theology. The more boring one is to say that the plural Elohim is merely an expression of majesty, like the royal "we." The more wild one, accepted among some Jewish scholars even now and the Gnostics of yesteryear is that both Elohim and the original human he created here was androgynous or intersex.

[halconero]

On 4/9/2022 at 6:24 PM, JLHPROF said:

“An interesting sidelight is given to this time through a possible glimpse of the thought-kernel which grew into such fragrant bloom in the full-voiced poem of Sister Snow. It was told by Aunt Zina D. Young  to the writer as to many others during her life. Father Huntington lost his wife under the most trying circumstances (1839). Her children were left desolate. One day, when her daughter Zina was speaking with the Prophet Joseph Smith concerning the loss of her mother and her intense grief, she asked the question:

“`Will I know my mother as my mother when I get over on the Other Side?’

“`Certainly you will,’ was the instant reply of the Prophet. `More than that, you will meet and become acquainted with your eternal Mother, the wife of your Father in Heaven.’

“`And have I then a Mother in Heaven?’ exclaimed the astonished girl.

“`You assuredly have. How could a Father claim His title unless there were also a Mother to share that parenthood?’

“It was about this time that Sister Snow learned the same glorious truth from the same inspired lips, and at once she was moved to express her own great joy and gratitude in the moving words of the hymn, `O my Father.'”  (Susa Young Gates, History of the Young Ladies’ Mutual Improvement Association of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from November 1869 to June 1910 (Salt Lake City: General Board of the Y.L.M.I.A., 1911), p. 16, footnote)

There are also the shared visions Joseph had in Nauvoo with others, most famously Zebedee Coultrin, wherein they laid in a field and looked up into heaven, wherein they say the Father and Mother.

There is another vision that is almost identical in its description wherein he shows them Adam and Eve.

Make of that what you will.

[Saint Bonaventure]

On 4/17/2022 at 6:56 PM, JLHPROF said:

Nobody is questioning intelligence, just whether inconvenient scriptures are acknowledged, ignored, or create a less literal explanation.

This scripture clearly states that God (specifically Eloheim - a plural word) created male and female in their image.

We either acknowledge that, ignore that, or explain it another way.

The Catholic Church can believe whatever it wants about the verse but it says what it says.

In general, Catholics are not usually inconvenienced by any one bible verse. It's kind of a superpower. Some Catholics just have a ton of confidence in the centuries of scholarship and enjoy the richness of it all. Then there are Catholics who don't know too much, but enjoy the homily and know that if they have any questions they can ask their priest or check online sources. And the priest, for his part, can get out on the diocesan list serve and inquire of the couple hundred other priests, religious sisters and brothers, the occasional professor, and online sources if he encounters a challenging idea.

Not buying into sola scriptura, and also having the magisterium and tradition, just depressurizes the whole thing.

So like in the case of Genesis 1:26, a Catholic could think, "that could be the royal 'We' or it could be the Trinity." And if a little more advanced, could get into the fact that the very next verse presents God with a singular pronoun or could go to all the verses that present God as a single being (I'll spare you those). A Catholic could also just think, "tradition and the Church Fathers teach such and such, or the dogma is such and such, or the Bible's a Catholic book," and everything's good.

My LDS friends seem to have an entirely different superpower. It's the "Bible translated correctly" superpower. I haven't experienced it in terms of translation much, but if "translation" is taken to mean "interpretation," then my LDS friends run things through the filter of the Book of Mormon, or another LDS scripture, or what an LDS Church authority says, or what apologists or BYU professors are saying and it's all good. 

We all need a little shelter.

To redirect, though, do LDS consider Genesis 1:26 as evidence of a Heavenly Mother at creation?