LDS - Belief in Heavenly Mother; Prayers?

[SteveVH]

Hi Steve:

The idea that God is a male actually originated with the Hebrews and has been continued down through the ages to this day. Jesus Himself refered to Him as Father and we always say “Him” and not “Her” or “It”. Assuming that He is male does help in our trying to understand His actions in relation to us.

I am not trying to contradict the Church, create controversy, or argument. I am stating plain fact. Intelligence, Logic, and what has been revealed to us in Holy Scripture is the only thing that we can go by or refer to. And yes, God is not human, He is divine and does not need sexuality for anything. Shalom haMeshiach.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

I understand what you are trying to say and, as I have previously stated, we must use human language to communicte therefore we are limited in our terms. God is not a something, but rather a Someone, therefore we must speak of God as a Person. But we cannot, in view of Church teaching and understanding, attatch gender when speaking of His true nature. He is Father in “relationship”, not in reference to gender.

"We ought therefore to recall that God transcends the human distinction between the sexes. He is neither man nor woman; he is God. He also transcends human fatherhood and motherhood, although he is their origin and standard; no one is father as God is Father." (CCC par 239)

 

[RebeccaJ]

,F

Which of course ignores the whole point that “plurality” was used in the Summa, hence why I stated that the Trinity doctrine is a plurality of distinct divine Persons that are one God. So again, your claim that I was being dishonest is false, and I hope you can apologize.

I’m not ignoring anything. I see clearly your tactics and have nothing to apologize for.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

,F

I’m not ignoring anything. I see clearly your tactics and have nothing to apologize for.

It’s okay, I also clearly see your tactics, and I may be wrong, but I recognize them from another forum.

 

[RebeccaJ]

That so? Unless you want to continue on all stalkerish, you can just ask, I’ll tell you.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Obviously if one is following the translation and interpretation given for a verse, then we would agree about what that verse is stating. Dr. Tigay states that translation 1 is the most likely one, and his uncertainty doesn’t detract from his belief that translation 1 is what the Shema means (and it is also the translation used in the NJPS translation). I agree with his assessment (that while other translations point to a monotheistic interpretation, these translations are improbable and problematic), and the NJPS translation, especially when reading Deut 6 in Hebrew.

You made three definitive posts about what the Shema IS based on one writers opinion of what it means:

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

“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.”

“I’ve already addressed what the Shema is about, and it isn’t about the nature of God, or about the existence or non-existence of other deities. It is about Israel’s relationship to YHWH. As the Commentary shows, it isn’t about what you seem to want it to be about”.

While I can understand your wanting to see it this way, in light of women being goddesses in compliment to men being gods but it doesn’t mean that you or Dr. Tigay have in anyway expressed more than an opinion on what the Shema means. And Dr. Tigay is honest enough to say “but it is not certain” and not present it as THE MEANING OF THE SHEMA, as you keep doing.

And now for something completely different. This computer is always on in the kitchen just to the side of the table. We all use it for phone numbers, store hours, movies playing, solving trivia disputes, all the handy things found on the interwebs, it is also the computer I use here. For some reason it seems to be the only one in the house we can reliably print from so the whole family uses it and as a result the kids have read a number of threads here and at MAD. I was a bit concerned because posters don’t generally think of kids reading what they post but I’ve found it’s lead to some good conversations particularly at bedtime prayers.

So New Years Eve we had some family and friends over and a friend of mine noticed this thread on the computer. Something said in one of the posts caught her eye and she read the whole thread. I guess I hadn’t realized that I had been introduced to LDS concepts relatively slowly. Being familiar with these concepts I never really thought how other may find them, for lack of a better word, shocking . Heavenly Mother, God the Father has a body, there are multiple gods, she was floored by this and had to “share” it with everyone else.

This made God and religion (4 different religions represented) a topic of discussion that everyone kept returning to.all evening. One might think that hearing the “bizarre” beliefs of other may lead folks to go off and make fun of them. This was not the case for the most part everyone (while still finding LDS beliefs bizarre) spent most of the conversations talking about what they believed. All in all a good way to spend New Year’s Eve.

 

[KathleenGee]

This is new information to me…

Have the Mormons actually dialogued with Orthodox Jews with their findings?

And to depend on the testimony of one person is not that Judeo Catholic way…In Judaism there is a progression and development of revelation within the gathering of the Jewish people, with God as their center.

The next revelation must fall in place and connect with the past.

In Catholic belief, revelation ended with Jesus Christ through His immediate witnesses – the apostles.

What is the common reaction by Jews of Mormonism and the lost tribe in America?..

So to use one person to make such a sweeping change of perspective would put that person, in the context of faith today within salvation history, practically on the same level as Jesus Christ.

Mary and devotion to her helps us to acknowledge truth and keep us close to Christ.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Have the Mormons actually dialogued with Orthodox Jews with their findings?

Mormon: "We see that Jews believe in a Council of Gods and would like to invite you to get to know our goddess, who we call “Mother in Heaven”. Though, most likely she was not in this Council because these Councils would only be for gods, not goddesses. OH, and by the way, that fallen god called Satan was in in this Council of Gods. What are your thoughts?

Jews: blank stare

 

[Stephen168]

Perhaps this article will be helpful for you:

fairlds.org/pubs/MotherInHeaven.pdf

To Summarize the article:

Mormon belief in a heavenly mother is based on their understanding that our spirits existed before our bodies were born; our bodies have earthly parents, therefore our spirits have heavenly parents. Mormons reject the Judeo-Christian belief that God creates from nothing, so everything in the ‘pre-existence’ has to be created by someone. Mormons also reject the Judeo-Christian belief that God does not have a physical body, so he is able to have sex and make spirits babies. And as the ‘physical’ children of God can become just like him.

As Mormons do, they have a one verse basis for this belief by referencing Genesis 1:27, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” Because Mormons believe God has a physical male body, he created man male and female, God cannot create from nothing; therefore there must be is a female goddess so he can create.

Not to be out done by ancient Christianity, Mormons go back into ancient history to find someone at some time that might possible hold their view. They seem to have found what they need in the Semitic people of Egypt who lived 1000 years before Christ. These polytheistic people believed one their gods had a wife. A problem for Mormons is the name of the wife is condemned in the Old Testament because of the Jewish rejection of polytheism. Mormons overcome this obstacle by inventing possible mistranslations of the Old Testament were it could possible; if you changed a few letters, mean that the wife was praised. Or find a highly praised ideal and turn that personification into the wife.

All this relies on Joseph Smith being a prophet of God.

It seems Joseph Smith was actually trying to restore some kind of Judaism with Aaronic priesthood, polygamy, and polytheism.

 

[Javl]

I understand what you are trying to say and, as I have previously stated, we must use human language to communicte therefore we are limited in our terms. God is not a something, but rather a Someone, therefore we must speak of God as a Person. But we cannot, in view of Church teaching and understanding, attatch gender when speaking of His true nature. He is Father in “relationship”, not in reference to gender.

"We ought therefore to recall that God transcends the human distinction between the sexes. He is neither man nor woman; he is God. He also transcends human fatherhood and motherhood, although he is their origin and standard; no one is father as God is Father." (CCC par 239)

Thank you Steve for your comment(s). I am quite knowledgeable with the CCC. But, to communicate with others not of our faith, others with no understanding, and with non-Christians ( whether or not they are wrong ) we must state that God is Male. Thereafter try to bring the truth to them and try to make them understand. Shalom haMeshiach.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Javl]

To Summarize the article:

Mormon belief in a heavenly mother is based on their understanding that our spirits existed before our bodies were born; our bodies have earthly parents, therefore our spirits have heavenly parents. Mormons reject the Judeo-Christian belief that God creates from nothing, so everything in the ‘pre-existence’ has to be created by someone. Mormons also reject the Judeo-Christian belief that God does not have a physical body, so he is able to have sex and make spirits babies. And as the ‘physical’ children of God can become just like him.

As Mormons do, they have a one verse basis for this belief by referencing Genesis 1:27, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” Because Mormons believe God has a physical male body, he created man male and female, God cannot create from nothing; therefore there must be is a female goddess so he can create.

Not to be out done by ancient Christianity, Mormons go back into ancient history to find someone at some time that might possible hold their view. They seem to have found what they need in the Semitic people of Egypt who lived 1000 years before Christ. These polytheistic people believed one their gods had a wife. A problem for Mormons is the name of the wife is condemned in the Old Testament because of the Jewish rejection of polytheism. Mormons overcome this obstacle by inventing possible mistranslations of the Old Testament were it could possible; if you changed a few letters, mean that the wife was praised. Or find a highly praised ideal and turn that personification into the wife.

All this relies on Joseph Smith being a prophet of God.

It seems Joseph Smith was actually trying to restore some kind of Judaism with Aaronic priesthood, polygamy, and polytheism.

Yes, and the main reason that they do this is to find some means to legitimize the LDS Church so that mainline Christians will accept them as true Christians instead of a non-Christian cult, such as the Jehovahs Witnesses.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[KathleenGee]

The nature of God has male characteristics as the provider, protector, omnipotent…

 

[KathleenGee]

I think it would be wise for the Mormons to engage in more dialogue with Judaic scholars because it is 1830’s Americans Joseph Smith and his inner circle who make the claims to knowledge of the ancient lost tribe. Judaism is left in the dark.

 

[Javl]

I think it would be wise for the Mormons to engage in more dialogue with Judaic scholars because it is 1830’s Americans Joseph Smith and his inner circle who make the claims to knowledge of the ancient lost tribe. Judaism is left in the dark.

I don’t think that the LDS would dare do that. If they did with Orthodox Jews they would go down not only in flames but be very embarassed in having to change their Jewish geneology. I am surprised that no Jew has taken the LDS to task for their statements. But then, the Jews are too sophisticated to bother with fantasies.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[flyonthewall]

w

I don’t think that the LDS would dare do that. If they did with Orthodox Jews they would go down not only in flames but be very embarassed in having to change their Jewish geneology. I am surprised that no Jew has taken the LDS to task for their statements. But then, the Jews are too sophisticated to bother with fantasies.
PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

Would that be the same Jewish religion that was at the time of Jesus?

 

[Javl]

w
Would that be the same Jewish religion that was at the time of Jesus?

Yes, definitely. The Hassidim in particular. The Hassidim are the modern day equivalent of the Essenes.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[flyonthewall]

Yes, definitely. The Hassidim in particular. The Hassidim are the modern day equivalent of the Essenes.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

The same Jewish religion that did not recognize the Son of God when in their midst?

Are you implying that the Jews kept geneological records of the tribes that were…lost?

Given the choice between God, and the Jewish religion, I would choose God as the source of accurate information.

 

[SteveVH]

Thank you Steve for your comment(s). I am quite knowledgeable with the CCC. But, to communicate with others not of our faith, others with no understanding, and with non-Christians ( whether or not they are wrong ) we must state that God is Male. Thereafter try to bring the truth to them and try to make them understand. Shalom haMeshiach.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

At the risk of beating this to death, I don’t see why we don’t just tell them the truth in the first place. I would never tell someone that God is a male. He is not. He is God.

Peace my brother.

 

[JeanMichel]

I agree with you that God, the Father, is male. So is the Holy Spirit. But to “logically conclude” that God had/has a female counterpart is really not only building strawmen, pushing the envelope, fantasy, wishful thinking, etc., but is utterly ridiculous.

First, there is NO indication or mention of any female counterpart or divinity in any of the Judaeo-Christian Scriptures. There is no mention of such in any Gnosis texts or spurious Gospels. And second, God, being Omniscient and Omnipotent, needs no female counterpart for ***absolutely nothing *** is impossible for Him.

I think you had better re-read the scriptures and try to understand what they say and mean. This time do it without any LDS spin.

I know that Jesus said to direct our prayers to the Father, but where in the Bible does He say not to pray to Him? Jesus is God the same as the Father. He was worshipped by the people, disciples, and Apostles and yet did not admonish them for that. So why should we not pray to Him too?

As a comment: I have been told by different Mormons that Heavenly Father had sexual intercourse with Mary to beget Jesus and that Mary occupies a place alongside Heavenly Father in His household.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

Danger, danger Will Robinson. From the standpoint of logic your first statement is wrong and leads to a precarious position that does not hold water. If you agree that God the Father is “male” is it is not logical if there is no female. Are you sure you think God the Father is actually male from a sexual viewpoint? If so, what does a male gender mean if there is no female gender?

I hate to always be pushed into taking Devil’s advocate in these conversations, but the arguments are just so bad that I feel forced to comment. Does all Catholic doctrine find its foundation in scripture? No of course not. Marian adoration is not found in scripture…unless we use a very definite “catholic” spin. (This issue of spiin is odd to accuse others of having without admitting that we ourselves have our own spin; talk about straw man arguments!)

Trinitarian doctrine allows for a very distinct difference between the persons within the Trinity. They have definite roles. Attempting to draw a conclusion because Jesus did not direct us NOT to pray to him is building a foundation on sand. Would you allow Mormons or any other group the same degree of flexibility? Jesus did not say to not pray to the a great number of people, should we all pray to them anyway? Of course not!

I believe it was Brigham Young that stated in his own writings that he thought the conception of Jesus was done in the same manner that all conceptions happened. I have been corrected many times by Mormons from assuming that means intercourse. They have also stated that their doctrine is found in the scriptures and the Book of Mormon supposedly states that Jesus was born of the virgin Mary in several places; thus they say their church doctrine is clear that Jesus was born of a virgin regardless of Young’s comment.

Friends, apologetic commentary needs to be sharpened and clarified. Let us not be found guilty of the perverse type of anti-Mormon tripe found among the Evangelical world. Let our commentary come from the light of Truth. Let us not pass on this puerile, churlish nonsense found elsewhere, but let us speak as befitting of true Christians. Our words are just as important as our works; they are our fruit to be observed by others who seek the truth. When our fruit is bad we push others from truth and light. Let us only bear good fruit before the world.

 

[KathleenGee]

Javl,

It would be good to share your link here regarding the off shoots of Mormonism because we have seen various takes on what Mormonism is.

There is absolute truth, that Jesus Christ, true God and true Man, lived, appointed His apostles to begin His church, that these Apostles through the imparting of the Oral tradition of Jesus Christ, appointed their successors, that the succession of Peter has never been broken, and that Jesus Christ has left us His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in the Eucharist, and has given us the sacrament of Forgiveness of sins through Reconciliation.

The ending words of St. John the Evangelist clearly defines who is apostate, and we know for fact that the successors to the apostles in their bishops and early church fathers were not of those who were unchaste, defilers and idolators, and others who would end in the the pool of fire and sulfur.

St. John the Evangelist was the one who cared for Mother Mary. A Mormon woman came on here, or she was at one time a Mormon, and shared that her bishop greatly discouraged her from pursuing a devotion to Mary, the Mother of Christ, Mater Redemptoris. If only more women knew of Mary.

Mary is the one who makes the Church a family. Priests say the strongest Catholics are those who have devotion to Mary…

 

[Robert_in_SD]

LDS do not know much about Heavenly Mother. We believe that we are only to offer prayers to God the Father. We do not believe that she can intercede for us, as only Jesus Christ is our mediator.

Perhaps this article will be helpful for you:

fairlds.org/pubs/MotherInHeaven.pdf

BYUChemAlum;

Welcome to the forums and thanks for the link to the article. While I find it interesting that the LDS church is looking to the OT to support the notion of a Heavenly Mother, I’d like to know why it is she does not play a more prominent role in LDS theology. Why have there been no further revelations of her role in the LDS deity. It is obvious that she plays a substantial part in our creation from an LDS theological perspective. Yet, there has been no revelation to restore what has apparently been obscured (by LDS thinking) according to the article.

Again, thanks and welcome.

Peace,
Robert