Share This Episode
Outer Brightness  Logo

Is There a Mother in Heaven? (LDS Gospel Topics Essay Series)

Outer Brightness /
The Truth Network Radio
January 16, 2022 11:59 pm

Is There a Mother in Heaven? (LDS Gospel Topics Essay Series)

Outer Brightness /

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 165 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


January 16, 2022 11:59 pm

Michael swung by Outer Brightness to discuss the LDS Gospel Topics Essay on the LDS doctrine of a Mother in Heaven. In this first part of the conversation, they discuss how they viewed thsi doctrine when they were LDS and whether or not they felt an affinity for the doctrine. Finally, they discuss each of the passages from LDS canon that are cited in the essay as supportive of the doctrine.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Matt Slick Live!
Matt Slick
Viewpoint on Mormonism
Bill McKeever
Viewpoint on Mormonism
Bill McKeever

Your right and and fireflies look back to out of brightness.

As you can see we got the band back together. Michael Flournoy sphere a.k.a. Dr Pepper and for the first time ever we… Cling here welcome Matthew Dr. Clint a good to be here and I'm not as a lot is fun to have around his Dr Pepper got in here to Michael. Welcome back to long yeah for sure glad to have you were with us for this episode.

So this this episode, fireflies will be talking about one of the gospel topics essays I reached out to Michael to have him pick one of them and decide it would record a bonus episode for season six.

So be reading through the mother and have an episode Ironside mother and help mother and have an article on gospel topics essay and then we got some questions that were discussed between the three of us. So before you started a quick intro to this topic.

So when I was a teenager. I distinctly remember occupying my typical sacrament meeting position, sitting next my mother hunched over in the pew staring at my shoes and trying to convey to her with my my posture just how miserable I was being dragged out of bed on a Sunday morning, however, that Sunday was different because a member of the bishopric was making an announcement that members were not to pray to heavenly mother. He quoted from Gordon B. Hinckley, who was then the first counselor in the first presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and he had spoken in the October 1991. General conference and warned against church members who were advocating that women should pray to mother in heaven. My young mind was burning because this warning combined with 23 August 1991 statement from the first presidency condemning symposia like Sunstone made me aware for the first time that there was a vocal group of dissenters within the LDS church that worried the leadership and I was already aware of the polygamist groups in Utah who were outside the LDS church. But this morning about praying to the mother in heaven notified me that there were some codified doctrines that the leadership of the church considered dangerous. So that's our topic today. Heavenly mother and will reduce have Matthew read through the whole of the article. It's this fairly short it's it's just over one page so you can read through that and then will jump into the discussion questions I thanks Matthew to come. The first question I want to get into is what was your first experience with this distinctive LDS doctrine of mother in heaven, and did you feel any affinity for this doctrine. Matthew will iron Mike will be first okay so I vaguely remember being very young man will my dad told me we can become God's concept of 21st saying you know a thing as a child, or as offspring that grow up to be exactly like whatever produced and since were children of little children of God and become God someday as well, but I think he was even a couple years beyond that when he told me I got was Mary as well so those currently shock hard to you in my life.

But of course growing up in the church made logical sense because unlike a you got the married and sealed in order to be exalted or and is worth following the same pattern that our heavenly father followed that it makes sense in that regard being in a priest group in church where the patient can brought this up a little bit to so my colleagues were saying why don't we ever talk to my class as you talk about her and his response was, well, she's very sacred and is public knowledge of her.

They would align her and say all kinds of terrible things and obviously that would hurt God very badly to have his wife talked about like that and so I don't know that I had a huge acidity for maybe because I never really had much of a relationship with my mother growing up so having a heavenly mother just didn't have a huge appeal to me. I didn't know that was supposed to look like or anything so my mission and of course Sherry's mom just speculating about all kinds of deep doctrine so that came out that a lot of their opinions. After this life, we would only be sealed one by multiple wives and I like that at all like you know what you think has more than one wife only have one and there was why would you want to diminish your progression like that and site really my mission is a big fan of the whole idea if it's not in the canon is not Scripture that's kind of how I let my worldview together and so I can find any evidence of family mother in Scripture as I really believe that that wasn't a true doctor so I was actually Mormon. He didn't believe in heavenly father, so you really had any doctrinal said that about if he couldn't find it in the in the canon. Then you didn't grasp it as a as a strong doctrine or something that you felt like you were bound to believe Matthew knock on you and I'm just not sure what that version of yesteryear reading from the first paragraph from in the version you are reading has a significant section cut off because it starts out and says the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints teaches that all human beings male and female are beloved spirit children of heavenly parents, heavenly father and heavenly mother. This understanding is rooted in scriptural and prophetic teachings about the nature of God in our relationship to duty and the godly potential of men and women, and then it goes into the first sentence that you would read but I think it's also significant that that the first part of the second paragraph versus while there is no record of a formal revelation to Joseph Smith on this doctrine.

Some early latter-day St. women recalled that she personally taught them about the mother in heaven. So – that is important to get that out there. A lot of what Michael said, you know that yes, it kind of acknowledges that it's it's it's dubiously tested, even in LDS canon as a doctrine, but Matthew what were your thoughts on the first question was your first experience with this document. Did you feel an affinity for now. It's one of those things where grub LDS.

You can adjust know you just kind of absorbed through osmosis doctrines and you're not going entirely sure when you first enter when you first about it. I do remember having discussed this with my dad was quite young about that yet become God's number asking about that going God's is kind related to mother in heaven, but despise specifically that I did notice you don't really remember. It is just something that you just take for granted. At least I did kind of especially when it mentions later on yesterday about the family proclamation to the world's specifically talks about heavenly parents, and the whole idea of eternal progression. This idea that were kind of falling CPAP. God has which a lot of LDS today will challenge and say the best, not canonical are sought for shoulder. Whatever you know they might try to squeeze in an eternal God that never progressed, or does never got above but if you just take the eternal, the classic additional LDS view of progression. It just makes sense. You know, I just kind of fits the puzzle. So is really something that I really question it wasn't something that really latched onto wasn't something I really just don't know particularly strong feelings about I just kind of said cable you parents under a sense this can work from there.

I'm with you there. My Matthew did just this kind of ubiquitous in Mormon culture to to adopt this this understanding of reverently parents who have heavenly parents, and no member, my first understanding is this probably came with like listening to that the soundtracks were watching Saturday's warrior or my turn on earth. Some of those 1970s LDS musicals that kinda touch on this idea that we were created spirit children first in a in a pre-earth life and then sent here and Part and parcel with that is that this idea the other heavenly mother as far as whether or not I personally felt any affinity for the document I didn't. I know that my paternal grandmother did a number on them to give a trigger warning here for any listeners who may want to bow out. If topics like like suicide make you uncomfortable.

Feel free to about at this point, but my on my birthday 50 years before I was born. My paternal great-grandmother took her own life and my paternal grandmother, who was 17 at the time found her and then ended up being surrogate mother to her two younger sisters as they grew up. So my grandmother was 17 and my at my her youngest sister, who she was closest with my great aunt Viola was seven at the time that my great-great-grandmother took her life so it was a very difficult and traumatic experience for my grandmother and I remember her talking about that, and yes he mentions Eliza Snow's home that has become the LDS camo. My father, that was one of my grandmother's favorite hymns because of the line about there being a mother there as well so desires, bring that up because it's not a doctrine that I felt food before but I do have within my own family. Some women who very much related to this doctrine so that the conversion of all appreciate that listening. However, unlike Jesus is born and raised in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in order commonly referred to as the all of us have left that have been drawn to faith in Jesus Christ as our podcast writing this text, John.

19 calls Jesus, the true light which gives light to everyone you found life young woman is brighter than we were told in the light, we have is not our own comes to us from without is to share our journeys of faith God has done in joining us to his son that you found this histogram so it's good to essay mentions several scriptural passages that it indicates your latter-day Saints believe give evidence of this doctrine slips. Let's take a look at those and turned the first one is Genesis 126 and 27 and I will read that it says and God said, let the start over. 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 creep with upon the earth. So God created man in his own image in the image of God created he him, male and female created he them.

So what was your understanding of this passage is a is a latter-day St., did you see it giving evidence to the doctrine mother in heaven, Michael hi, that I was really serious about Scripture after my mission. No, what I did see was that it was making a case for us having a parents like God having physical bodies of flesh and bone to arms teabags definitely make that argument, but I didn't see it promoting our heavenly mother, but I do have family that will point to this low stated clearly there were female gods as well. You Matthew yeah I don't know.

I'm trying to remember. It seems like I would point to this is like the other week, there were made to look like to make to make us look like God. I guess it depends on to what extent that's true and I guess most LDS to take this very literally in terms of like this is still look like God. Since women don't look like heavenly father is man you know I probably did use that as justification to show that there must be an refiling and have the mother and so I guess that let us make man in our image, no, most Christians will say that that's seeing that that's the end, it urged intra-Trinitarian speech with the father the son and Spirit speak together but I guess this is Steve that is either God talking to Jehovah like him talking to Jehovah, which is father. Jesus or but if you if that's the case, and then that would mean you have the mother in office making man in our image meeting man and woman in both the image of heavenly father, heavenly mother that would mean the mother was also spinning Creech and it seems like depends on. I do remember notions of like LDS leaders say that priesthood leaders in the preexistence were participating in creation, so that must mean the Hadley mother holds some kind of priesthood in order to do that so it gets kinda complicated if you try to go down that route. Using this passage in particular to prove that were being made in the image of God requires of mother and father is just a little bit really going to mean this to have arguments with my family members over this to see an example of this. These two cats and is this black cat named Dracula and they had a litter and one of them was this black female kitten.

I understand you look just like Dracula and acting just like Dracula but here even though she was female. She was in the image of her father, you know, so I mean there's just not enough space. This is not specific enough to indicate that there has to be a female God for that to be true even if he was to feel he is understanding to be correct that it is talking about physical appearance on which I will argue that it's not because it seems to actually be calling you pointing that out to be like did many of you know and that's talked about immediately after they got our image and give them dominion over everything else on the earth, so that was just my thoughts. Good planets. As I was reading through the essay again a few weeks ago in preparation for this episode, I noted that language that I think is I think it's really restrained what they say when they say this understanding is rooted in scriptural and prophetic teachings about the nature of God. They don't say they don't go so far as to say that this misunderstanding is taught clearly in Scripture, or this understanding is not anything like that that so dogmatically they really restrained what they say if it's rooted in scriptural teachings.

It's not necessarily evidenced by insecure point Michael where you're sending others none the specificity here within Genesis 126 and 27. I would agree with that.

The next morning scriptural passage that they cite is Moses chapter 3 verses 4 to 7 with one of you like to read that, or I can get it up if you like me to read it. I guess I don't have that right now that's a go. I read it and now behold I say unto you, that these are the generations of the heaven, and of the earth when they were created in the day that I the Lord God made the heaven and the earth and every plant of the field before was in the earth and every herb of the field before it grew. For I the Lord God created all things of which I have spoken spiritually before they were naturally upon the face of the earth, for I the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth, and I the Lord God had created all the children of men and not get a man to till the ground floor in heaven created I've been in there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water neither in the air, but I the Lord God spake and they went up a mist from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground and I the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul. First flesh upon the earth.

The first man also. Nevertheless, all things were before created spiritually. Were they created and made. According to my word. So this passage it doesn't really mention even all right.

It doesn't mention females. What it does mention is that the LDS idea of the spiritual creation. Your before physical creation which then leads to the doctrine of the preexistence. So would you have used this passage, Matthew or Michael jumping as you see fit to to support a doctrine mother in heaven. Personally, I would never have gone to this passage to argue that a heavenly mother existed, but I might have gone there to prove that there was a preexistence. You know, I think that just to kind of an explanation that there was a pre-existing material that we were all created spiritually before being created physically. I might go that route, but I just don't see the argument for a heavenly mother here at all surprised to see what made the article that one thing that is interesting in looking at and Romans chapter 4 in verse 17 is written. I've made you the father of many nations in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist. Basically saying that God by his word has created out of nothing. Everything that exists. So really flies in the face of Moses saying here that everything was created spiritually. First, there was a pre-existing material because there simply was not anything like that tangent. I now know this could Matthew any thoughts on the book of Moses, chapter 347 passage and it's really dad, I can agree with Michael that are used preexistence of the pre-mortal existence for call it not so much for your mother about you Paul yeah I agree I was nine when when Michael just now studying this chapter the made in the article is likely I better go back and make sure that I did this site what they were siding but know that the first footnote is where they list all the scriptural passages where they say that this is rooted and Moses 347 is there so I'm not sure exactly what they what they are going for their except maybe just there trying to support the idea that there was a preexistence and ends the first sentence of the essay which says that male and female all all human beings male and female are blood spirit children of heavenly parents or maybe they're just trying to support that general advice. Thanks to Moses. Moses says that there was a preexistence okay so good on you Michael for going to Romans cadets accident excitation. I have Romans chapter 8, 16 to 17 I got it. The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God and the children and heirs. Heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. How does how does this passage support a doctrine of the mother in heaven is where children of God, and if you take that literally. I guess you could imply that there must've been a heavenly mother, but it just gets a little bit awkward when the context is just one verse away and completely changes the meaning because in verse 16. I just pointed out verse 15 not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, you received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, and the father of four children by adoption. Obviously that completely takes the wind out of the sails of heavenly mother yeah it's tries to connect just as being literal children of heavenly parents, but doesn't explicitly send an explicit statement that we are in a heavenly mother so it's kind like you have to fit into the system then used well if we have only if we have earthly parents are probably other mother in heaven as well. So it's kind of yeah that seems to kinda be like with how the title together and yes Michael said. If you read in context, it doesn't really tell you that were little children. It's funny because this is talking up the leaks. You know, but I disbelieve that were everybody believers are literal children of heavenly father and heavy mother.

So like, what's the point of encouraging Christians to like you know take cheer the work spirit no place our spirit that we are children of God and we cry out Abba father.

What's the point of the how does that encourage us to give us hope when it easiest to Spitz that the name of God curses Jesus's name every day. If they could say the same thing know it's it doesn't really make sense. Yeah that's a good point because your latter-day Saints will often cite this idea that were were literal children of of heavenly parents as is a reason for hope right to appoint Matthew knew someone who is an enemy to God.

If you have been being able to say that. How does how does that give them hope right if there is there an attitude of rebellion against God's own right and I just want to point out to like it sucks but we are children and heirs. Heirs of God and joint Christ does not meet everybody is an heir of God. Everybody's going to inherit everything in creation. Believe or not latter-day St. or not Judas all the people who are so the perdition were also literal children of God, yes, and LDS will say that you become a center perdition you're like no disown from the family.

I guess, but even even people and saw something in the not inheriting all that God has to not joint heirs with Christ. There like their given like a tiny little token gifts for Florida whenever it is dangerous out so it's like this passage talks about spiritual doctrine and then they picked this specific verse that they claim is talking about literal childhood of God, and it goes back to being spiritual adopted children because only that those who are children of Christ say will inherit all things, so it goes from spiritual to physical to spiritual or or or you know adopted literal adopted, you know, it does make sense in the context it doesn't make sense is does not mean that Christianity is that God is and send any of his children to hell with the more perspective he's already sent 1/3 of his spirit children already destined to go there just for not keeping their first estate, so I think that's a really problematic family is like Hazel really just a failed parent. If that's the case is a little bit awkward is my son back in the LES might stand a little bit and looking at verse 15 cited a minute ago.

It talks about crying father and then others just left out completely and is this is in perfect opportunity. It was true. For the Scripture to just Darren having Leslie. For some reason I love the LES and claimant Paul wasn't aware of this doctrine because the restoration played out the restoration billing had Christianity been fully brought to bear that plane or what is just seems very strange that it's absent. There, if it's true yeah yeah very good plan and that's the other line from yesterday kinda stood out to me is while there is no record of the formal revelations Joseph Smith on this doctrine. Some early latter-day St. women recalled that he personally taught them about a mother in heaven.

My my understanding of LDS teaching is that prophets and apostles are important because they are supposed to be the ones to receive revelation on behalf of the church and then deliver it to the church and yet this essays is kind of clear that there is no revelation from Joseph Smith on this doctrine and yet here we are talking about as a doctrine of the LDS church. How does that happen right so it's not, it is not something that's canonized in their and others put before the church for common consent. It's just kind of there is a cultural doctrine. Yeah, and what's crazy is just what you're saying is that a couple of women with accounts are coming up with this doctrine and data do not only not hold the priesthood when they do not hold priesthood keys and if that's the case why we need prophets and apostles at all. If anybody can come up with a doctrine because they said Joseph Smith told them in privacy and I now want to be careful here and tread lightly.

Michael you and I discussed possibly having no a female X latter-day St. Christian on the show for this episode with us to discuss this doctrine, because I've mentioned before that I came out of the LDS church kind of threw a detour along the path of of more progressive Mormonism where there are many women in the Latter Day Saints faith and on the progressive side of latter-day St. faith for him. This doctrine is very important right day and you know they looked at statements like Gordon B. Hinckley made and it hurts them and they look at the silence of Scripture on a doctrine of mother in heaven. And it hurts them because they think of something about women is distasteful and its being withheld in and the patriarch in all of that and so on.

Tread lightly and understand that that's that is the experience of of of some people. But I think what's interesting about the the line that I just quoted from yesterday were talks about there not being a formal revelation, but several women recalled him talking about it.

The footnote for that if you go to footnote 3 in the essay.

It cites assignment and the Huntington young, and says that she recalled that when her mother died in 1839.

Joseph Smith consoled her by telling her that in heaven she would see her own mother again and become acquainted with her eternal mother now sine die at the Huntington young was married to Joseph Smith is a plural wife on October 27, 1941, so this doctrine is tied up with his proposals to women for plural marriage which which might be an interesting link for why it doesn't completely disappear within Mormonism.

Even though it's not formally canonized as a revelation many thoughts on on that from other assurance interesting will yeah she's got an interesting fascinating history are so terms of polygamy and all that study didn't he think that was a genuine thing or was more of a like a reassurance like a stand about the smoke would Smith to her union. Yeah yeah I don't know.

I it's it's hard to get and it's hard to get inside the mind of someone you've never met and I know like a lot of Lotta people look at Joe Sneddon think of you know, he's just his gas lighting women he's sticking his all kind of this nefarious staff and I maybe I'm just also know recalling pieces about him that were written and very glowing terms and then aimed at getting you to feel sympathy with him in on think about like passage, the talk about when he was dragged out of the Johnson Houston Kirtland and tarred and feathered in the middle of the winter and in the exposure that is too young children experience at the time, ended up in the death you know so yes, it's hard to get at that whether or not he's genuine in his comfort to other people but it's also hard to do not think you know with some of the things that you did that and some of the lies that she told that there's some some duplicity going on with some mansard and start to say but just seems like something coming out here is very well known for coming up with things on the spotlight dissolves the light Nephi, he found a pile of bones and just kind of out of the blue got this revelation of the supposedly white Nephi, no yeah so that's can I dad is maybe a something in that industry consciously came up at the site is now.

Maybe they just popped into his head and he kinda rolled with so just interesting to think about and what you just said is interesting we could talk about another another episode like what he says about receiving revelation nine ideas pop into your head is very, very similar so okay to send something about a lot of things. Continuing really, why this doctrine would be very appealing to women in the church like you are saying because there is so much in the church that you cannot do if you are a woman right of me. You can't hold any leadership positions you can't even go bless your own baby when he named the baby, you know you can pass the slide actually have some some authority in and be something better is to be appealing, but I do think that it being a false hope at the end of the day because you looking at all these passages in Scripture and then Henry mother just just doesn't isn't really mentioned in all and even in the church like what happened with Fiona with humans and you're talking about before we start recording. You know something you don't don't pray to heavenly mother right like the church is about said that words like if she's a member of the Godhead. Why he should not even be the same inquiry as her children From being able to talk to her so today just sound like there is hope that you're going to be a goddess.

Someday his kind – by not getting to talk to my children when they are going through their mortality, which is a eternal life or death situation moment where they need you the most and you you cannot have contact with them but it's Vista. They may come back to you. They may not like. You may never see she's real and she's solid to this earth to steal a lot of us ever again. That said, we are now not worthy of her presence anymore. So I think about all that and I just don't know how I could only estimate screens, especially I don't know how I can possibly hold on to that belief. And actually hope for better things in the next life.

Let's go on to talk about the next two passages will come back to talking about some of the some of the recent happenings around this doctrine within the LDS church so the next one is Psalm 82, six either of you have better if not, I got up I can read it if I've got it.

Psalm 82 verse six thinking James says I have said your gods, and all of you are children of the most high. So what you think of this. This passage is a is a support for adoptive mother in heaven. Yes, similar to what we have talked about earlier in the Romans passage where just as you children of God our you know, created in the image of God as Genesis. It doesn't say anything about mother and have been sick and has to be like a deduction of 12 for like we've said multiple times if you have heavenly parents that are fundamentally will step Scripture earthly mother, father, mother must have heavenly father that we've talked about so especially with the gospel topic essay about becoming like becoming gods or becoming like God is the exact title, but having a three-part or four-part. Whatever was the gospel topic essay so yesterday long so so refer listeners do that one. If they want to know in depth are views of somebody to but in context I just hope he gets it's speaking of is either not spitting or speaking of a heavenly counsel, which doesn't include us or speaking elders.

No leaders in Israel at that time we were ruling unjustly, which also include us so use this as justification for our be literal children of God. It doesn't work either way, no matter how no matter how you slice it down for sure and it's so it's a Psalm of judgment to verse seven actually says, but you shall die like men and fall like one of the princes.

So whether it's what it's referring to heavenly counsel right. The divine counsel were whether it's referring to leaders within Israel. Either way, the judgment coming upon them.

Here is not good they're not leading the people justly and so the that the penalty of that is coming is being declared upon them so you had to to refer to this passage is a is a support for the doctrine of the mother of a mother and have his kind of an interesting approach to to take a think like any thoughts on this passage I agree with what you said.

I think that this is just trying this to support that we can become gods and just trying to put out 100 different tax on the wall to make a picture of you know you you deduce enough different points eventually point to their being heavenly mother again. I think what really always bothered me is that there was never a clearer Scripture anywhere that says that there is a heavenly father. So this verse again does the same think I would've taken you guys to task a little if I was still LDS is John chapter 10 verses 34 and 36 where Jesus quotes the passage because the Pharisees say that he is blaspheming because he is making himself God in verse 34 Jesus stands is not written in your law. I stated your gods if he called them gods, under whom the word of God came in the Scripture cannot be broken. See him him the father has sanctified and sent into the world down blasphemers because I said I am the son of God. So, couple things in that first in an ongoing and a little bit of a tangent here is like is that none of this even here in John 10 supports their being a heavenly mother, but resources that they were calm gone through the word of God came which is that's that's dispensed human beings and that he's using it in a way for evangelical staying in the Psalms is talking about like judges or somebody in authority. But here Jesus seems to be using in in the context of how can it be blasphemy for me to call myself the son of God, it Psalms says you are God.

I was surprised the Pharisees didn't come back to you okay when you're using ISA Jesus care like that's not that passages talking about and seems actually kinda confused them and now they stop questioning him here so use any thoughts on that. Yeah.

So my thought on that takes omitted to is not referring to heavenly counsel divine counsel of angelic beings but rather taking it to me and judges in Israel who are not judging the people righteously been the way Jesus seems to be using the passage in John 10 is to say that judges in Israel.

Someone like Moses right was a judge in Israel judges in Israel can be referred to as quote unquote gods because they represent God to the people and so later and earned another and another passage in the New Testament, Matthew 23 two Jesus says that the scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses deceit writing and enjoins the people to to to take heed of their word because they they are sitting in the rifle seat of Moses as a judge of the people is judges of the people so he says not to do their works right because their works are are not righteous right so is he does seem to be saying that if you taking so many cheers as judges within Israel, and now this year.

He could be referring to the Pharisees and send you know. It doesn't say in your lawn, you are God's records are sitting in Moses, deceit, and how much more in a while would be blasphemous for me to say that I'm the son of God, so that that that's kind of what he could be doing there unquote. Thanks. Right yet on anything that expected so the final passage that the site in the essay is doctrine and covenants one 3219 to 20. Do either of you have that I'll read it. If not so 19 is that Mize will be a book on its own, but there does. And again, verily I stand here if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed into them by the Holy Spirit of promise by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of the priesthood shall be said unto them, you shall come forth in the first resurrection and if it be after the first resurrection and the next resurrection, and shall inherit throne's kingdoms, principalities and powers dominions all heights and depths, then show it be written in the Lamb's book of life, that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood. And if you abide in my covenant, commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood is shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever, my servant have put forth upon them in time and through all eternity and shall be of full force when they are out of the world, and they shall pass by the Angels and the gods which are set there to their exultation and glory, and all things as have been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fullness in a continuation of the seats forever and ever eventually be gods because they have no and therefore they shall be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them, then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the Angels are subject unto them, so of it of any of the passages that we've read tonight.

This to me would seem to be the most direct one that that could be read as supporting a doctrine of the mother in heaven.

If you if you within the worldview of of the latter-day St. Scripture that says there is an infinite regression of God's male and female. Going back into eternity and that there will be forever never going forward into eternity as well as men and women are sealed together under the new and everlasting covenant of marriage which was originally having to do with polygamy. So any thoughts on this passage with relation to a mother in heaven, Michael, Matthew yeah couple thoughts about this passage, it's hilarious like is not hilarious, but that it basically says that you can get away with anything as long as you don't murder anybody so apparently you can go around robbing banks and telling people into into slavery. Anything else and that's fine you get slapped on the wrist and you're still going. Go figure.

Exaltation. I think that completely destroys the justice of God in that verse seven that lady said all this is definitely the closest passage to say I made it clearly says that men and women are to go on to become gods and if you believe in the infinite regression of God's logically, there must be a heavenly mother heavenly grandmother, so on and so forth. But again, it does not actually specify that there is a broken record. You can it still has to be inferred logically, that there must be a heavenly father, and I think that there are other parts of Scripture that make it an impossibility. For example, they called the father the most high God. And so that becomes a problem that is your latter-day St. listening are you really think about this is the father is the most high God that he's not equal to his wife is he so so there's an unequal union, even though she's she's a goddess. Somehow he's a still greater or not equals on and I also think that whole thing takes away the idea of there being an infinite regression of God's name when I was only asked actually believed that the father was the original God that he was not created at any point and if that's the case you need a wife because he would just be something that a Christian does not understand what he is. Think I'll go back to our discussion earlier to think it was both was it was young again said she got Natalie mother was only ghost we talked about the only ground that so there's an article in the Salt Lake Tribune. It touches on this and just for the benefit benefit of our listeners. Carolyn Fiona dividends are Mormon neo-apologists. I guess you would determine that Mormon authors they've written a number of books Terrell on his own and then Fiona on her own and then the two of them together both both in a well studied and credentialed LDS scholars, but they were both working for the Maxwell Institute at BYU, which was formally named forms the foundation for engine research and Mormon studies, but has undergone a cultural transition in terms of what Scott whatever scholarship it wants to put out less apologetic and more scholarly and so Fiona Givens had recently done a study as I understand it, of ancient references to female deities in the form of pillars of light and then she was comparing that to you in a fireside virtual file fireside to the first vision of Joseph Smith where he talks about seeing a pillar of light and so I just was making me the suggestion that the father the son and the mother were present at the first vision is that as the Godhead and on. She's quoted we find the quote here and hang out and look at them.

Article try to find exactly where she says the line about the Holy Spirit and I'm not finding it but indicate she was. She was asked unless your when a sound like maybe a in and are in an interview if if she thought the desires I guess the interviewer was was seeing the implication of that that that heavenly mother would be that the Holy Spirit and asked her if she thought that was a case and choosing to indicate yes and the quote in this article and I and I can share this article in the in the show notes so people can read for themselves, but she's so Fiona Givens gave this fireside and then pretty quickly after that. I guess this was in May 2021 pretty quickly after that was no longer employed by the Maxwell Institute at BYU and is turning down requests to speak publicly so it does sound like she was reprimanded for sharing her views in that regard. So there's the background for our listeners. Any thoughts from you Matthew or Michael and then yeah just just kind of missing or passing because that, because I found also.

We are talking before recording in Margaret Barker made 2015 family conference presentation called the mother and her children. I think she's like a Methodist or something like that, but she's often quoted by LDS. She's very much on the like liberal Canada scholar spectrum is yes very aberrant ideas as compared to historical Christianity and so master the question number five do you believe the Holy Ghost is her mother. Heaven is yes and then question seven. Should the traditional concept of the Godhead. I father son and Holy Ghost include her in her answer as well. It does so she was going thing is like secret or lost knowledge that people used to worship leading of the Holy Ghost as heavenly mother. Supposedly this interesting. That kind of connection she tries to make but my original point was, but if were talking about.

Like Michael I think is about God being the most high God.

If you think of it.

Heavenly mother is the Holy Ghost will then give the heavenly father which is top and then Jesus Christ, which is right below him and then his wife. The Holy Ghost is below Jesus. So, in the hierarchy. His wife comes below Christ and the causes problems. Also, because the Holy Ghost so she has been resurrected so I mean to me that causes all kinds of issues if he considered that way because we look forward to our resurrection that's that's why Christ was resurrected us to give us hope there is there is life after and that we will be reunited with their bodies in heaven, but she doesn't have that yet. So for however many eons. She has existed. She has been disembodied and so the only times you ever actually get her bodies after everybody was ever born on this planet will live and die, accept or reject the gospel and entities done and then maybe she'll get about four guys Michael; she's by the Godhead, but my worshiper, but he's not the Holy Spirit, then she's a God that's equal supposedly empowered to the father but she's not in the Godhead for 64th member that nobody knows about. So we try to look at it trying to fit heavenly mother somewhere in there just doesn't make any sense in yellow.

Also refer listeners to the ups we have with the episodes we had with that air shuffle off where we talk about exaltation dilemmas in Mormonism where we talk about these expanding Godhead sort, you know, will Jesus also be part of another Godhead and met at the top so that will let me that Jesus is part of two separate Godhead see no one in this universe look for his own universe, and that when we become God's will, we become enough of planning asked will we become gods in our Godhead. Will that keep happening where you got these overlapping Godhead's.

There's all kinds of issues when you consider the entire system of exaltation and the obvious system for sure. And for the benefit of our listeners as well. Like you mentioned Margaret Barker so yeah she's a she's a Methodist scholar who has written quite extensively on Temple theology trying to re-create the theology of the of Solomon's Temple the first Temple and kinda makes the suggestion consistent with like the dinner, and on the history theory, which is that you know Deuteronomy was written later during the time of the exile and but big.

Kinda makes the Order Barker penetrates make the case that that the theology of the first Temple was different than the theology of the second Temple, which was focused on more priestly, more priestly role that you see in in the law of Moses and Scott tries to make room for a female deity being part of temple worship and then ends worship and in Israel before the exile, so it's it's it's definitely a line of scholarship in Latter Day Saints love to jump into. I think one of you mentioned when we were talking before we hit record that the Nephi's Asherah article. I think it was Daniel Peterson the road that I may be wrong, and maybe somebody else but if somebody farms wrote that try to make the case that Nephi in the book of Mormon refers to a female deity and then then tie that to Asherah worship in the Old Testament, so there's a business. An alternative line of scholarship.

The more liberal side of Christian scholarship and looks at Asherah worship in the in the Old Testament is once being a normative thing within Israel and that later managers.

It's a very feminist approach to the Old Testament that later men trainer, wrote out a female deity out of Scripture. So Margaret Barker does that and then Daniel McClelland is an LDS scholar does that as well to see him do it on the standard on tick tock quite a bit on this tick-tock videos she's a Scripture translation for the exact title unreasonable Scripture translation for the LDS church in an official capacity, but he studied under Francesca stop at the pool I think is her name and she she does a lot of the same kind of scholarship about a mother in heaven about female deities. I recall seeing her. Not that long ago.

A few years back I saw the video I picked I think it's from maybe seven years ago maybe a decade ago she was on a British talkshow interest being asked about her scholarship and she was being pretty she's pretty color firebrand. She's pretty skimpy, pretty offensive at times like she was just making bold claims you like Moses never existed. Those counterclaims and you know basically said about the men who wrote Scripture that they were a bunch of men with daddy issues and so you know that that kind of I would say not grace filled and not a charitable approach to scholarship is not something I really would like to time I had on sales. I sometimes find it interesting that Latter Day Saints do and Daniel McClelland studied under Francesca's Francesca stop Caputi.

She was that I think you mentioned one of the videos she was his basis of advisor.

So this is interesting to me how how Latter Day Saints will latch on to the more liberal forms of scholarship to transport their beliefs still disarming up on a big tangent there, but I wanted to make sure and get that in our that's it for this episode, fireflies next week will be back with the rest of our discussion of the LDS gospel topics essay mother in heaven and retuning in thank you for tuning into this episode of the outer brightness podcast. We'd love to hear from you. Please visit the other brightness podcast page on Facebook.

Feel free to send us a message there with comments or questions and clicking send a message at the top of the page. We would appreciate it if you give the page alike.

We also have an outer brightness group on Facebook can join and interact with us and others. As we discussed the podcast past episodes and suggestions for future etc. you can also send us an email outer brightness Gmail.com Hope to hear from you soon. You can subscribe to outer brightness wherever you listen to podcasts. If you are benefiting from a content please write a review to help us spread the word subscribe to our YouTube channel and hit that notification will use it for other brightness is graciously provided by the talented Breanna Flournoy and Adams Road. You can learn more about Adams Road. By visiting their ministry. Page at Adams Road. Ministry.com is diseased in my cheese is now said Jesus is the and a and a and she is a a a is the a and a a is is is being


Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime