LDS - Belief in Heavenly Mother; Prayers?

[RebeccaJ]

Interesting…First, a lot of assumptions there about what was abandoned, and no evidence this occurred. Perhaps reading the deuterocanonicals would help out here.

What is your evidence that the pagan views were the correct views, and not monotheism?

I read the article. It states Mormons believe in a mother goddess, the same as Israel believed in a mother goddess. I see both as pagan in origin. I see everything you type as an attempt to justify a return to OT pagan errors. Errors that God very patiently and over a long period of time, led Israel from, not to.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

First of all, welcome to the forum. Its good to have another Mormon point of view.

Your statement begins with a preconceived notion: “We believe that God is embodied, and therefore…” This preconceived notion then dictates the conclusion that “image and likeness” means “we are embodied like Him”. Is this not circular reasoning?

No it isn’t circular for a number of reasons. Firstly, LDS believe that God is embodied because He has revealed Himself as such, to Joseph Smith, as well as throughout the Bible. Therefore, to know what it means to be created “in the image and likeness” of God, we must know something about what the “image and likeness” of God is. Since we believe that God has revealed Himself to be embodied, we therefore know that “image and likeness” refers to a physical image and likeness (though not to the exclusion of other similarities). As mentioned before, we also find support for this use of the phrase “image and likeness” in Genesis 5:3. Therefore, to know what Genesis means when it says that we are created in the image and likeness of God, we must know something about that image and likeness to say how exactly we are created in His image and likeness.

Similarly, Trinitarians believe that God (the Father) is unembodied, therefore, “image and likeness” could not refer to a physical image and likeness.

Let me take this in another direction. Is there any way, concerning our nature, that God is unlike us or that we are unlike God?

Thanks.

LDS believe, as I am sure you are aware, that we are all children of God, and therefore, we have the same “nature” as Him. We believe that through the atonement of Jesus Christ, we can therefore become like Him. We are unlike God in that we are not omniscient, omnipotent, and the other omnis. God is love, we are not.

 

[SteveVH]

Again, you are the one that insists on sexuality and then blames us for it. LDS do not mandate that gender must always be linked with sexuality. I can be male without being sexual, and I believe God has that capability too…I don’t limit Him by gender, but it seems like you do.

To “not mandate that gender must always be linked with sexuality” is like saying that my legs must not always linked with walking. It is a matter of self-evident fact, not opinion.

Okay, remove the word “express” and we still have:

¶And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

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

The scriptures very cleary state that we are made in Their image, and our image is after Their likeness.

Tell me, what about the Trinity is male and female? God the Father is, as you say, genderless. Jesus Christ was a male in His mortality, and so that must mean the Holy Spirit is female? Please explain…

Nothing about the Trinity is male or female. As I have stated, our likeness is in “relationship”, not gender. We have gender because we are created. God has no need for gender because He is the Creator, not the pro-creator. Human life depends upon a sexual relationship which requires male and female. Divine life is not dependent upon a sexual relationship therefore gender is a moot point. You are under the mistaken assumption that “image and likeness” necessarily translates into male and female.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

Interesting…First, a lot of assumptions there about what was abandoned, and no evidence this occurred. Perhaps reading the deuterocanonicals would help out here.

Are you at all familiar with the deuteronomistic reforms? If not, then perhaps you need to read up on that. The deuterocanonical texts (which I am quite familiar with, as well as various pseudepigraphical texts) do not detract from the conclusions of Barker, Smith, etc. on the Josiah reforms.

What is your evidence that the pagan views were the correct views, and not monotheism?

Firstly, what are you referring to as “pagan views”? Aside from what some may see as polemical value of referring to “pagan views”, you need to be clear as to what it is that you are talking about. What I have stated multiple times is that the Bible (which I assume you accept as inspired) contains many references to the Divine Council, and such an idea is completely in line with LDS theology. The Jewish notion of an absolute monotheism, with no plurality in the Divine (which obviously rejects any notion of a plurality of divine Persons, for one), is a departure from the Biblical evidence.

I read the article. It states Mormons believe in a mother goddess, the same as Israel believed in a mother goddess. I see both as pagan in origin. I see everything you type as an attempt to justify a return to OT pagan errors. Errors that God very patiently and over a long period of time, led Israel from, not to.

As already mentioned, the article and the conclusion from it that I previously quoted discusses various differences between the LDS believe in Heavenly Mother, and the developments surrounding Asherah in Israelite belief. If you read those differences, then you would know that there are distinctions.

I don’t think I need to repeat what I’ve stated already on the Divine Council in the Bible. LDS belief agrees with that, and we reject the idolatrous excesses that are thoroughly rejected in the Bible. Referring to a vague “pagan errors” does not address the issue of Divine Council imagery that I have repeatedly brought up.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Are you at all familiar with the deuteronomistic reforms? If not, then perhaps you need to read up on that. The deuterocanonical texts (which I am quite familiar with, as well as various pseudepigraphical texts) do not detract from the conclusions of Barker, Smith, etc. on the Josiah reforms.

I have not hitched my wagon to these people.

Firstly, what are you referring to as “pagan views”? Aside from what some may see as polemical value of referring to “pagan views”, you need to be clear as to what it is that you are talking about. What I have stated multiple times is that the Bible (which I assume you accept as inspired) contains many references to the Divine Council, and such an idea is completely in line with LDS theology. The Jewish notion of an absolute monotheism, with no plurality in the Divine (which obviously rejects any notion of a plurality of divine Persons, for one), is a departure from the Biblical evidence.

I don’t want to tell you what your views are, but what they appear to me you are reading the Bible similar to how atheists read the Bible. That is, that everything you read is conveying what God wants. Confusing the actions and desires of men with the actions and desires of God.

It is an incorrect way to read…especially Hebrew scripture, which often tells a story of what went wrong, and how the justice and mercy of God prevailed. What went wrong is not what you should be following.

The OT relates pagan practices, that you seem to want to return to. Catholics follow the Jewish tradition, of understanding that the OT conveys Israel mired in paganism. KathleenG has pointed out that when Moses brought the tablets containing the Law, he found the Hebrews worshiping a golden calf. They had already broken the Law before Moses arrived, and so he broke the tablets, the same as they had broken the Law.

You should understand that yes, I see a progression of the Chosen People of God in the OT, from polytheism to monotheism. Descriptions of pagan practices and beliefs, such as a council of gods, but it is clear in Deuteronomy that Israel had finally (thanks be to God) let go of their pagan beliefs, entirely.

I’m getting from your posts that you seem to think this means someone erased something somewhere and something was lost.

I see that you must charge that scripture is in error in order to match your beliefs, rather than match your beliefs to scripture.

As already mentioned, the article and the conclusion from it that I previously quoted discusses various differences between the LDS believe in Heavenly Mother, and the developments surrounding Asherah in Israelite belief. If you read those differences, then you would know that there are distinctions.

As I said, I see no distinction. Both are polytheist and introduce a pantheon of gods to religious belief and understanding. Christians and Jews reject this.

I don’t think I need to repeat what I’ve stated already on the Divine Council in the Bible. LDS belief agrees with that, and we reject the idolatrous excesses that are thoroughly rejected in the Bible. Referring to a vague “pagan errors” does not address the issue of Divine Council imagery that I have repeatedly brought up.

I don’t mean to be vague with “pagan errors”…that is you trying to splice Mormon polytheism from OT paganism, while all the while using OT paganism as the support for Mormon polytheism…they can’t be separated, as you have yoked them together.

 

[SteveVH]

No it isn’t circular for a number of reasons. Firstly, LDS believe that God is embodied because He has revealed Himself as such, to Joseph Smith, as well as throughout the Bible. Therefore, to know what it means to be created “in the image and likeness” of God, we must know something about what the “image and likeness” of God is. Since we believe that God has revealed Himself to be embodied, we therefore know that “image and likeness” refers to a physical image and likeness (though not to the exclusion of other similarities). As mentioned before, we also find support for this use of the phrase “image and likeness” in Genesis 5:3. Therefore, to know what Genesis means when it says that we are created in the image and likeness of God, we must know something about that image and likeness to say how exactly we are created in His image and likeness.

Similarly, Trinitarians believe that God (the Father) is unembodied, therefore, “image and likeness” could not refer to a physical image and likeness.

Fair enough, but would you say that your interpretation of those biblical passages which you believe refer to God as having a physical body are based upon Joseph Smith’s purported revelations first and foremost? In other words, would you draw this conclusion without Joseph Smith’s (name removed by moderator)ut and can you understand why others would not?

LDS believe, as I am sure you are aware, that we are all children of God, and therefore, we have the same “nature” as Him. We believe that through the atonement of Jesus Christ, we can therefore become like Him. We are unlike God in that we are not omniscient, omnipotent, and the other omnis. God is love, we are not.

It seems that this doctrine picks and chooses which attributes we received by being made in His image and likeness. Just my opinion. So you would agree, at least, that “image and likeness” does not translate across the board.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

I have not hitched my wagon to these people.

It isn’t about hitching your wagon to anyone. It is about knowing the context of the development of Israelite religion, as well as the historical development of the Biblical texts.

I don’t want to tell you what your views are, but what they appear to me you are reading the Bible similar to how atheists read the Bible. That is, that everything you read is conveying what God wants. Confusing the actions and desires of men with the actions and desires of God.

Of course not. The actions and desires of men can be distinguished from the actions and desire of God, when they are to be distinguished (i.e. accepting when God authorizes someone to do something in His name).

It is an incorrect way to read…especially Hebrew scripture, which often tells a story of what went wrong, and how the justice and mercy of God prevailed. What went wrong is not what you should be following.

Obviously, which is exactly what the article I linked to quite clearly stated…

And of course as a Latter-day Saint, I readily accept that the scriptures and God’s interactions with humanity are a story of God’s infinite love and mercy, and how He always turns us back to Him after apostasy.

The OT relates pagan practices, that you seem to want to return to. Catholics follow the Jewish tradition, of understanding that the OT conveys Israel mired in paganism. KathleenG has pointed out that when Moses brought the tablets containing the Law, he found the Hebrews worshiping a golden calf. They had already broken the Law before Moses arrived, and so he broke the tablets, the same as they had broken the Law.

LDS also follow the Jewish tradition (and you need to be clear as to what is “Jewish tradition”, what time period it’s from, etc. Having much familiarity with Hebraic studies, I am well aware of the varying nature of historical Judaism, including today.

You should understand that yes, I see a progression of the Chosen People of God in the OT, from polytheism to monotheism. Descriptions of pagan practices and beliefs, such as a council of gods, but it is clear in Deuteronomy that Israel had finally (thanks be to God) let go of their pagan beliefs, entirely.

Except that you do not address the facts of the Divine Council imagery being used in an inspired work, as a description of God’s relationship with other beings in Heaven. It seems that you want to say that these parts of the Bible are incorrect. It reminds me of the Jewish explaining away of the “us” in Genesis 1:26-27, denying any plurality in the Divine.

I’m getting from your posts that you seem to think this means someone erased something somewhere and something was lost.

I see that you must charge that scripture is in error in order to match your beliefs, rather than match your beliefs to scripture.

Except that I have done exactly that, match my beliefs to scripture, hence the repeated reference to the Divine Council within scripture. The excesses are to be rejected, as has been repeatedly stated, however it is clear that the Old Testament teaches a plurality within the Divine, which the Jews reject incorrectly in favor of an absolute monotheism (that also rejects the plurality of Persons found in traditional Trinitarianism).

As I said, I see no distinction. Both are polytheist and introduce a pantheon of gods to religious belief and understanding. Christians and Jews reject this.

Jews also reject the traditional Christian notion of a plurality of distinct Persons. The distinctions are quite clear, including a rejection of the idolatrous excesses of the Hebrews (referred to in the article, as you should know from reading it), the rejection of worship of Heavenly Mother, etc.

I don’t mean to be vague with “pagan errors”…that is you trying to splice Mormon polytheism from OT paganism, while all the while using OT paganism as the support for Mormon polytheism…they can’t be separated, as you have yoked them together.

What I am doing is showing that the Bible supports LDS theology in accepting a Divine Council. LDS reject, as the article cited states, the pagan idolatrous excesses of the ancient Israelites. The article’s conclusion that I posted earlier clearly shows the purpose in referencing Asherah in support of LDS teaching (including showing various positive references to her in the Hebrew Bible), and clearly rejects the idolatry that God rejected.

 

[RebeccaJ]

BYUChemAlum,

You ignore where Israel was ultimately led. Deut. 6:4…
**
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God [is] one LORD**

I’m not really sure what you don’t understand about this, and why you attempt to bring in pagan beliefs that were no longer believed or practiced at this point.

Peace.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

Fair enough, but would you say that your interpretation of those biblical passages which you believe refer to God as having a physical body are based upon Joseph Smith’s purported revelations first and foremost? In other words, would you draw this conclusion without Joseph Smith’s (name removed by moderator)ut and can you understand why others would not?

I think that one can definitely draw the conclusion that God is embodied from the Biblical record, and from what I have read, this has been done anciently.

For LDS, Joseph Smith’s revelations make it explicit, and restored, the belief that both the Father and the Son are embodied, and that “spirit” is not immaterial.

It seems that this doctrine picks and chooses which attributes we received by being made in His image and likeness. Just my opinion. So you would agree, at least, that “image and likeness” does not translate across the board.

I think that whether one accepts the LDS interpretation of “image and likeness” or the traditional interpretation, one does not believe that we have all of the attributes of God.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Jews also reject the traditional Christian notion of a plurality of distinct Persons. The distinctions are quite clear, including a rejection of the idolatrous excesses of the Hebrews (referred to in the article, as you should know from reading it), the rejection of worship of Heavenly Mother, etc.

Excuse me, but Christians do not believe in a pantheon of gods and goddesses without number, no matter how you try to spin it, we don’t…this is a diversion.

Christian belief is in ONE GOD, Mormons believe in many gods. There is no comparison.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

BYUChemAlum,

You ignore where Israel was ultimately led. Deut. 6:4…
**
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God [is] one LORD**

I’m not really sure what you don’t understand about this, and why you attempt to bring in pagan beliefs that were no longer believed or practiced at this point.

Peace.

Actually I understand it quite well, including in the original Hebrew. Here is what Jeffrey Tigay, Professor of Hebrew and Semitic Languages and Literatures at the University of Pennsylvania, states in the Jewish Publication Society’s Torah Commentary on Deuteronomy. I completely agree with what the Torah Commentary states, though I am not sure that you do (since I assume you are interpreting the Shema as referring to God’s nature).

 

[BYUChemAlum]

Excuse me, but Christians do not believe in a pantheon of gods and goddesses without number, no matter how you try to spin it, we don’t…this is a diversion.

Christian belief is in ONE GOD, Mormons believe in many gods. There is no comparison.

Now where did I state that traditional Christians believe in a pantheon of gods and goddesses?

What I did state is that Jews reject the traditional Christian notion of a plurality of distinct divine Persons, which is what the Trinity teaches. Jews accept an absolute monotheism that rejects any plurality within the Divine, while the Trinity doctrine clearly teaches that God exists as three distinct divine Persons, which Jews would find blasphemous. Saying that there is “ONE GOD” does not detract from the belief that there are distinct Persons in this God, which is clearly what I was commenting on.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Actually I understand it quite well, including in the original Hebrew. Here is what Jeffrey Tigay, Professor of Hebrew and Semitic Languages and Literatures at the University of Pennsylvania, states in the Jewish Publication Society’s Torah Commentary on Deuteronomy. I completely agree with what the Torah Commentary states, though I am not sure that you do (since I assume you are interpreting the Shema as referring to God’s nature).

It is obvious that the Jews were led out of their polytheism to the truth of One God, otherwise, Jews would be talking about multiple gods. They don’t.

It is obvious you want to return to PAGAN ERRORS.

Of course I am in agreement with the Shema…my allegiance is to One God because there IS NO OTHER. Not because I think there are lesser gods floating around who I should just ignore because they are wimps.

Peace.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

It is obvious that the Jews were led out of their polytheism to the truth of One God, otherwise, Jews would be talking about multiple gods. They don’t.

It is obvious you want to return to PAGAN ERRORS.

Peace.

Thank you for not addressing the post/Torah Commentary .

 

[RebeccaJ]

Now where did I state that traditional Christians believe in a pantheon of gods and goddesses?

What I did state is that Jews reject the traditional Christian notion of a plurality of distinct divine Persons, which is what the Trinity teaches. Jews accept an absolute monotheism that rejects any plurality within the Divine, while the Trinity doctrine clearly teaches that God exists as three distinct divine Persons, which Jews would find blasphemous. Saying that there is “ONE GOD” does not detract from the belief that there are distinct Persons in this God, which is clearly what I was commenting on.

You attempt to place your Mormon errors onto Christianity. It is dishonest.

Good day.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Thank you for not addressing the post/Torah Commentary .

I edited.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

Of course I am in agreement with the Shema…my allegiance is to One God because there IS NO OTHER. Not because I think there are lesser gods floating around who I should just ignore because they are wimps.

Peace.

And from reading the Torah Commentary, we see that the Shema is not about God’s nature.

 

[RebeccaJ]

And from reading the Torah Commentary, we see that the Shema is not about God’s nature.

It certainly isn’t saying God is one among many but ignore those other gods thank you for your cooperation now you too will be a god and float around not worshiped by anyone but people who think you’re the biggest baddest god of them all. good day.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

You attempt to place your Mormon errors onto Christianity. It is dishonest.

Good day.

This post does not address my post. Traditional Christians clearly believe that the one God exists eternally as three distinct divine Persons. Jews reject as blasphemy any notion of plurality of/within the Divine. Demonstrate what was dishonest about my post.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

It certainly isn’t saying God is one among many but ignore those other gods thank you for your cooperation now you too will be a god and float around not worshiped by anyone but people who think you’re the biggest baddest god of them all. good day.

The Shema isn’t a commentary on the existence or non-existence of other divine beings, but a statement on the relationship between Israel and YHWH, their God. It has nothing to do with the nature of the Divine. I completely agree with the Torah Commentary.