- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
We all know “we are all children of our Heavenly Father”, spiritual brothers and sisters etc… but what about our mysterious Heavenly Mother (HM)? Do we all have the same HM?
The family proclamation states that we are created in the image of God and are the spirit children of heavenly parents. It indicates nothing that there is a female parent. It also states that our spirits are eternal, so I don’t know why we needed to be created if we already existed.
I think the concept of a separate heavenly mother is a result of speculative and comforting theology. Maybe she exists, but she could be a plant for all we know. Also, consider that God never made a distinct statement of gender. ‘God’ could refer to both.
God created man in his image, male and female.
Isaiah 66:13 As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you; and ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem.
Along with other bible references that pop up, God as a mother hen, God as a mother eagle, God as a woman who held her tongue, but will not any more.
We are the ones who decided God is basically a cross between Zeus, Santa Claus, and Gandalf.
I’m kind of aware of that ReflexZero, but I’m thinking orthodox LDS theology. After all, we’re told HF has flesh and bones etc. I’m interested in HM here, not only the position on her, but if we’re supposed to come from multiple mothers or just the one.
“God as a mother hen,”
Yes, I looked up the Greek for that last year. I think it refers to a mother bird, if I recall correctly.
Quote:It also states that our spirits are eternal, so I don’t know why we needed to be created if we already existed.
Or parented…
Heavenly Mother is solidly entrenched in current Mormon doctrine, albeit generally in terms of heavenly parents. I think it’s really hard to interpret that phrase as anything other than the existence of at least one Heavenly Mother – but it certainly opens the possibility of multiple heavenly mothers. Frankly, I see the use of terms like Adam, Eve, Lord, God, etc. as titles rather than names. (man, woman/mother, master, ruler, etc.) Thus, I see them and others that I could mention as plural in nature, not singular – and, therefore, I have no problem seeing “Father” and “Mother” in the same way (as descriptive of a role – “creator” or “organizer” – rather than individual, personal pronouns). I also believe in a Council of the Gods construct rather than the singular God of mainstream Christianity. I think that is solidly and centrally Biblical, even as it’s denied by most Christians.
I believe strongly in the concept of Heavenly Mothers – but not in the way most members do.
Well, the story doesn’t have Adam hanging out with Eve, Bernadette, LaFonda, and Julie. He only gets one wife to set the example. Lilith notwithstanding. I do not feel polygamy is a principle that has any merit, godly or earthly.
Quote:Well, the story doesn’t have Adam hanging out with Eve, Bernadette, LaFonda, and Julie. He only gets one wife to set the example. Lilith notwithstanding.
I don’t think there’s an “example” either way. I think it’s a generic creation myth focused on men and women, how we came to be and our relationship to deity. I don’t believe it happened literally, so I’m free to interpret it however I want – in whatever ways make the most sense to me (and I’m fine interpreting it multiple, conflicting ways and taking from those multiple interpretations whatever I want).
Quote:I do not feel polygamy is a principle that has any merit, godly or earthly.
Neither do I, when it comes to mortal, traditional polygamy – but I think there is great merit in the concept of familial and communal sealing.
Reflexzero wrote:Well, the story doesn’t have Adam hanging out with Eve, Bernadette, LaFonda, and Julie. He only gets one wife to set the example. Lilith notwithstanding.
I do not feel polygamy is a principle that has any merit, godly or earthly.
But isn’t it interesting how quickly we change our perceptions of God to fit with our current practices. When the church was practicing polygamy – Jesus, Elohim, and the pre-mortal Adam, suddenly were all polygamists. We seem to crave to worship something that is similar to ourselves. Something that can be familiar in some ways and understand us more fully. Someone had the tag line that if triangles worshipped God – he would be described as triangular. I believe that is the true strength of the HM, to give women and others that are seeking a more feminine/maternal divinity an option to express that yearning.
Roy wrote:But isn’t it interesting how quickly we change our perceptions of God to fit with our current practices. When the church was practicing polygamy – Jesus, Elohim, and the pre-mortal Adam, suddenly were all polygamists. We seem to crave to worship something that is similar to ourselves. Something that can be familiar in some ways and understand us more fully. Someone had the tag line that if triangles worshipped God – he would be described as triangular. I believe that is the true strength of the HM, to give women and others that are seeking a more feminine/maternal divinity an option to express that yearning.
Absolutely. Read the church’s bible stories book to your kids, and suddenly everyone in it is a Mormon. In movies and comic books they call it retcon, or retroactive continuity.
As humans we have to personalize and humanize the stories to find justification and something we can relate to. As Carl Sagan said, a god that is limited to the sum of the forces and laws of nature is not emotionally satisfying. It is more difficult for Mormons, who personify God as basically a Zeus figure, as opposed to those who feel God is a cloud or a presence, to not try and categorize him as being like all the other ideal Mormons. Married with children.
The idea of God as single parent for example, is probably repugnant to many. Contrast that with those that cannot relate to a male authority figure, to them, a strictly male God is unsatisfying and fundamentally flawed.
Ray, I do agree with you, and I think the Temple makes a vague emphasis to your point. Adam and Eve are the human race. The same approach can be taken with God or the council of gods, a simpler term to represent a more complex idea. Much like the symbol for infinity.
Unfortunate for most, the concept of Heavenly Mother falls into the category of: I don’t think we teach it, I don’t think we emphasize it. No one is going to talk about it at GC. Whatever the truth of the matter is, I think we do yearn for a connection, a counterbalance to God the Father, and it drives curiosity and debate, such as this, and others such as wondering if Jesus had a wife, (or wives, as some would support) and what is her status now.
If I have a Heavenly Father, then I have a Heavenly Mother. If God is loving, kind, gentle, and vulnerable, my Heavenly Mother will be even more so. I trust that She will be nothing like the vindictive, jealous, needy, intolerant, and sometimes just mean God that is described in the Old Testament. I imagine She is nothing but peace, love, tolerance, and acceptance. Reflexzero wrote:Well, the story doesn’t have Adam hanging out with Eve, Bernadette, LaFonda, and Julie. He only gets one wife to set the example. Lilith notwithstanding.
I do not feel polygamy is a principle that has any merit, godly or earthly.
Or as anti-gay people say Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve… argh don’t go there!!!
Am I right in thinking Abraham is the earliest polygamist in the Bible?
Anyway… although I have my own views on this I was interested in “official” views. Brigham Young must have said something?
Yeah, Brigham did – but I wouldn’t call anything said that long ago an “official view” now currently, any more than I would cite Paul from the Bible as the source of an official view. I like the concept of religious understanding evolving over time, even though that drives some people nuts.
SamBee wrote:
Am I right in thinking Abraham is the earliest polygamist in the Bible?
I think the first one to practice it was Lamech, who was within the first few generations, but I think Abraham was the next one.
One of the things that I like about the church is that we believe in a Heavenly Mother. One of the things I don’t like about the church is that she doesn’t actually exist in any tangible way. I recently decided to start praying to Heavenly Mother. When I prayed to her for the first time I felt bad that I was leaving Heavenly Father out. (Silly, I know) But I had an overwhelming feeling that they were both there and both listening and that they always had. A few people mentioned this, but I have been thinking the past few months that God is actually both, and that our whole Heavenly Father terminology may be a mistake.
You may well be right about the both thing. Maybe the church is worried about looking Catholic.
D&C 132:19-20: Quote:19 And again, verily I say unto you,
if a man marry a wifeby my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto themby the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto themin all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when theyare out of the world; and theyshall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon theirheads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever. 20 Then shall
theybe gods, because theyhave no end; therefore shall theybe from everlasting to everlasting, because theycontinue; then shall theybe above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall theybe gods, because theyhave call power, and the angels are subject unto them. It’s a reasonable statement of Mormon doctrine that a man or woman is not exalted alone – the sealing ordinance is required for a man or woman to receive exaltation. And as the above reference in D&C 132 point out, the path towards exaltation and the powers conferred and granted once there, is a plural experience. When it refers to “they” and “them,” it’s not referring in a general sense to all those who receive exaltation. The first sentence in verse 19 clearly indicates that “they” and “them” refer to a man and wife who have been sealed.
Based on this, it’s not a far stretch to say that a “god” in Mormon theology is a man and woman sealed together, who have received exaltation together. So as to the question of whether or not there is a “Heavenly Mother,” I think Mormon theology quite clearly would indicate that there is. Now, as to whether there is only one “Heavenly Mother,” or many … way beyond my pay grade. As others have said, though, the idea of a heavenly mother is a comfort to me. I like that idea – it sounds right to me, so I choose to believe it.
We might just have a “Earth Behavioral Experiment 2.7b Simulation Programmer” or “Distant Galaxy DNA Cloning Expert”. I’m not even convinced gender exists in the eternities.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.