It is Sunday. March 17, 2013. I have just arrived at church. Sacrament meeting is about to start. I settle into my family’s customary pew with my wife and 16-year old daughter. The bishop comes over. He asks me to give the closing prayer. I agree automatically. No big deal. It’s not like I haven’t done this a million times before.
The meeting begins. I start ruminating on how this day would have been my parents’ 72nd wedding anniversary. I miss my dad. He died March 9, 2011.
I miss my mom. She died October 10, 2000.
I don’t miss one more than the other. I miss them both.
The sacrament is being passed. I feel a distinct impression to mention Heavenly Mother in my closing prayer. I try to shake the feeling. I can’t. This is something I am supposed to do.
Our high councilman is speaking now. I continue to wrestle inwardly. I think how easy it would be for me to ignore the impression; to just give an orthodox closing prayer. I think how nobody would be the wiser. Except me. I would know.
I realize giving a customary prayer is not an option. My wife looks over at me. She sees I am troubled. She asks what is wrong. I say, “I hate it when God asks me to do hard things.”
She asks me what it’s about. I say it has to do with my closing prayer. She looks alarmed. She asks me what I am thinking of saying. I say, “God has bidden me not to tell you.” I am kidding. But I don’t want to get into a conversation with her about it in the middle of sacrament meeting. Even though we are whispering, there are people all around. Before and behind.
She tells me I don’t know this is from God. I tell her that actually, I do. She says it could be just something I want to do. I tell her there is no way I want to do this. She says I need to consider my audience. I tell her I figure God has already considered that.
The end of sacrament meeting approaches like the footsteps of doom. On the bright side, no sacrament meeting has gone by faster. Especially with a high councilman speaking.
The congregation sings the closing hymn. We are at the last verse. I walk up to the stand. My knees are like water. I think they might buckle.
I have settled on what I will say. I know I just have to get the words out of my mouth. The hymn ends. I step to the microphone. I look out over the congregation. Every head goes down. My heart hammers in my ears. I plant my feet shoulder-width to steady myself. I grab the lectern with both hands.
I take a deep breath. I begin:
Dear Father and Mother God . . .
Wish I could have been there.
How did people react?
Wow! And did the high councilman just throw you on the ground and give you the elbow drop?
Imagine if you went further and asked Mother to support and strengthen Father through His hardships…the HC would have had a stroke!
I bet a lot of people nodded as you said your prayer, though…
No, fortunately our high councilman is kind of spindly.
I did struggle with whether I should begin with “Mother God” before “Father God,” but figured I better go with the Patriarchal Order of Prayer so none of the older TBM’s would have a heart attack or anything.
Well, at least the walls didn’t crumble!
After the prayer was over, the bishop thanked me for the prayer and gave me a wink. I told him, “Out of small and simple things shall great things be brought to pass.”
He laughed at that.
He’s a cool bishop.
Later that day in church, I am told the high priest group leader made a point of huffily commenting in the presence of the bishop about how wrong it is for people to pray to Heavenly Mother.
Other than that, folks mostly kept their comments to themselves.
It did sound like everybody said “amen” at the end of my prayer,though.
But that may just have been the Pavlovian response kicking in.
Thanks so much for this, Corbin. Is it not amazing that we have become so comfortable living in a Motherless House? We are so pleased with our commitment to “every child deserves a home with a Father and a Mother”–certainly not two dads. In the meantime our spiritual home has Three Dads–the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. We are so blind. Thanks for doing this and for sharing.
I am so honored and pleased you would comment on this, Carol!
I am a huge fan!
The Church was radical enough in Joseph’s day to envision a Heavenly Mother, but conservative enough in our day to not want anybody to talk about her; and God forbid pray to her.
Missionaries can typically call home only two days a year.
The first day is Christmas.
Can you guess what the second day is?
Hint–It’s not Father’s Day.
What a disrespectful Prayer, honoring heavenly mother! There is zero reference in the Bible and Book of Mormon which honors this person you mentioned in your prayer! There is a reason why this “name” is not given by any Prophet of Old. The prophet Abinadi warns of people like you, Brother. Your wife was the inspired one. You listened to the promptings of the “Fallen Angel”.
Mosiah 15:1-5 is where the Prophet Abinadi tells King Noah, Alma and the others present why there is nothing honoring this individual. “1 And now Abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. 2 And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son— 3 The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son— 4 And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth. 5 And thus the flesh becoming subject to the Spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation, and yieldeth not to the temptation, but suffereth himself to be mocked, and scourged, and cast out, and disowned by his people.”
There was a war in heaven and “mommy” wanted to save all her spiritual children, so she gave a Plan to save everyone. Jesus/Heavenly said NO WAY! and 2/3rds sided with Him. So Jehovah left with 2/3 and she and 1/3 stayed on this earth (Kolob). Alma the Younger told us all about the “many lives” one has in mortality (Alma 40:5) and later in that same chapter, the Lord tells everybody that even the 1/3 will have bodies of flesh and bones on the earth where the “fallen Angel” presided for 6,000 years. This ended on April 5, 2000.
Please stop honoring Lucifer. There are many scriptures which talk about “her” as the ewil one. Have fun looking them up. They are everywhere (like 1 Nephi 11:18 in the 1830 Original Book of Mormon — excludes “the Son of”)
You are kidding.
*tries not to make eye-contact*
Kidding or not, it’s kind of an interesting take. The whole war in heaven just being a divine divorce and gigantic custody battle. Hey, at least it would explain why God seems so jaded and doesn’t want to give them women folk very much!
Please, let them be trolling.
Seriously, PLZzzze get educated and enlightened about “Heavenly Mother” being a TRUE DOCTRINE of the Savior’s Church because it is if you do any kind of light research! You’re the kind of person that will be ASTONISHED when you pass through the veil and MEET HER! Even “Elohim” means “Plural Gods!” Hmmm Father created us “Male AND FEMALE…” that ought to also be a CLUE! Plz read or reread the lyrics to the Hymn “Oh, My Father” as well!
In the Bible and Book of Mormon Christ commands us only to pray to the Father in His name.
Prayer to or including others is idolatry and a breach of the 1st commandment.
Momma gonna give you a big whuppin’!
thank you for sharing this. I've been praying to Mother and Father for quite some time, even at church, which I no longer attend. NO one was cool with it when I did it at church. Nothing happened, just daggers and never asked again. I;m pretty matter of fact about it. Too me it's pure logic – where there's a father, there is also a mother, end of story. Carol Lynn Pearson's words about the LDS church being a "motherless house" affected me deeply as I begans my search for Mother. Bless you for listening and acting…perhaps Mother was the one prompting you?
Thank you so much for your kind words, Sherry. Already in the comments, I am seeing a lot of the “daggers” to which you refer.
How can it be “disrespectful” to pray to Heavenly Mother?
It seems to me “disrespectful” to completely ignore her.
If Mormons really believe in a Heavenly Mother, how do we think she feels being ignored all the time?
And frequently we justify ignoring her by claiming she is too holy to be mentioned.
Which seems to me similar to the way many LDS justify not giving the priesthood to women because they are so righteous, they don’t need it.
At least we are consistent . . .
Corbin, I admire your determination to follow inspiration rather than to cave to social and cultural pressure. I also admire your honesty. That trek to the pulpit has felt like a walk to the gallows to me many times when I knew I had to say something uncomfortable. You are my hero 😉
That is super nice of you to say, Cate!
Isn’t it strange that in a Church where pretty much every member believes in the existence of a Heavenly Mother that we should experience such trepidation just mentioning her in prayer?
What does that say about us?
What does that say about our view of Heavenly Father?
I remember mentioning once when I taught Sunday school that every single person in attendance had prayed at least one time publicly to Heavenly Mother.
They seemed shocked.
I then took them word by word through the final verse of “O, My Father.”
Elaine Pagels in The Gnostic Gospels reports that the Gnostics prayed, “From Thee, Father, and through Thee, Mother, the two immortal names, Parents of the divine being…” And the “Gospel to the Hebrews” (thrown out by the orthodox churches) tells of Jesus speaking not only of his Father, but of his Mother, the Holy Spirit. And John’s vision in the apocryphon contains the words, “John, John, I am the one who is with you always. I am the Father. I am the Mother. I am the Son.” There is much we have lost. And as well as mining the past for our lost coins, ought we not to use our good sense and our spiritual wisdom to create new ones? Incidentally, the hymn we know as “O My Father” was originally entitled “Invocation, or the Eternal Father and Mother.” (I have here an 1856 copy of Eliza’s poems.) She wrote it as a prayer, and every time we sing, “Father, Mother, may I meet you in your royal court on high?” we are speaking/praying to our Mother.
And everyone said, “Amen!”
I like to think the Holy Spirit is the Divine Feminine personage in the Godhead.
And while some of us are wondering where she has gone, it may turn out she has been with us all along.
I am reading Dante’s “The Inferno” for the first time right now, and am struck that even though it is Virgil who is Dante’s guide, he was sent to help Dante by a Trinity of three women:
The Virgin Mary, St. Lucy, and Beatrice.
The Dark Ages, indeed!
It’s an interesting read, to say the least.
I always appreciate your comments!
And for continuing to engage with me and Darren Croft in comments on the 14-Fundamentals blog.
Re: “O My Father”, I’ve seen the following commented upon only two or three times over the years on other websites, and I also taught it in one of my lessons in high priest quorum this past year:
Many Indo-European languages have two forms of the second person singular personal pronoun ‘you’, a formal one and an informal or familiar one. (For example, in French they’re ‘vous’ and ‘tu’. In Spanish they’re ‘Usted’ and ‘tu’. In German they’re ‘Sie’ and ‘Du’.) English used to have this distinction, too. We had ‘you’ and ‘thou’. We have so lost this distinction that most Americans think that ‘thou’ is not only archaic (which it is to us today), but is, if anything, *more* formal than ‘you’. This led Elder Oaks to give an inaccurate conference talk many years ago about proper prayer language. The talk as he gave it in English would have been untranslatable by the Spanish and other simultaneous translators while he gave it, because he stated that we should only use ‘thou’ in our prayers because it is *more* formal than ‘you’ and we should not use language that is too familiar when addressing deity. In Spanish at least (and probably true in French and maybe German), ‘tu’ (i.e., ‘thou’) *is* how god is addressed in prayer. And it is an intimate term, not formal.
In any case, I’m sure Eliza R Snow knew this distinction much better than we do today. Now here’s the thing that I think know one knows today (because we simply don’t use this bit of grammar), but that I’m also sure Eliza knew back then: There is a plural form of the second person *familiar* pronoun. (And you can actually look this up in the OED.) The other languages that have both forms of ‘you’/’thou’ often have separate plural forms, too.
Here they are (in their subjective/nominative, objective/accusative, possessive/genitive, and possessive noun cases):
2nd person singular familiar pronoun: ‘thou’, ‘thee’, ‘thy’, ‘thine’.
2nd person plural familiar pronoun: ‘ye’/’you’, ‘you’, ‘your’, ‘yours’.
So now looking at the lyrics to “O My Father”, one can clearly see that in the 1st and 2nd and the first half of the 3rd verses, Eliza is clearly addressing a single person, Heavenly Father. She uses the ‘thou’ forms throughout. Then after her musing in the send half of the 3rd verse, she proceeds to address *both* Heavenly Mother and Heavenly Father and *switches* to using the ‘you’ forms exclusively. Those uses of ‘you’ and ‘your’ are what in the American South would be “y’all” and “y’all’s”.
Now if D&C 25:12 is true (and I believe it is), every time verse 4 of this hymn is sung by righteous members, they’re praying to both Heavenly Mother and Heavenly Father. [In my more cynical moments I keep wondering if Salt Lake will remove this hymn, or at least this verse, from the next version of the hymnbook if they ever find this out.] [[So don’t tell them… 😉 ]]
Also, interestingly, there is some rather heavy-duty doctrine implied by this verse (that is openly sung is Mormon church meetings around the world!) that I have never heard even mentioned in Church meetings or publications. Like take “when I’ve completed All *you* sent me forth to do”. The Plan of Salvation that was decided upon in the pre-mortal council in heaven was not just HF’s plan, it was HF’s *and* HM’s plan. And “With *your* mutual approbation Let me come…”. So *both* HF and HM will judge (?), or approve of Christ’s judgment, in determining who goes to the Celestial Kingdom.
Things must have been quite different back then that no one questioned her about this back then (and no one seems to have questioned it in all the time since then). A former (fairly conservative) bishop in the class came up afterwards and thanked me profusely for pointing this out. And the next time we sang this hymn in Sacrament Meeting, he tracked me down afterwards (and I could see that there had been some tears in his eyes) and he told me that he will never again be able to sing or hear this song in the future without it being deeply moving for him.
Your exegesis of scripture is novel, I will give you that.
As long as you’re citing scripture, though, you might want to review Revelation chapter 12.
And Proverbs chapter 8.
That should be enough to get you started.
Revelation was written by Mary Magdalene (Joquim was her middle name = John). Proverbs deals with the worship of the Israelites, which many times worshiped the “god of this earth, the Fallen Angel”, or heavenly mom.
A woman wants to save her children, like Heavenly Mother wanted and fouight for. Heavenly Father sought to be an example, and as Abinadi stated == Heavenly Father came to this earth as Jesus. If Heavenly Father is Jesus Christ in the flesh, then how could the Holy Ghost be a “woman”?
Heavenly Father is truth and full-disclosure. The Fallen Angel will deceive and claim to be the “brother to Jesus”. Interesting topic, because my Utah computer company (Infosphere) translated the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hamati back in the 1980s.
So the Book of Mormon is many times more truthful and exact than the Bible, as stated in the Articles of Faith.
SDavis – How do you reconcile your belief that Satan/Lucifer is somehow Heavenly Mother, when Lucifer is clearly male?
“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!” – Isaiah 14:12
Lucifer is totally deceit and false information as warned in Deuteronomy 18:20-22 where a prophet can be tricked into false beliefs. The prophet Isaiah has a veil and simply thought Lucufer was a “man”: “But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.”
Back in April, 1995 General Conference President Gordon B. Hinckley gave a talk where “all is well in zion.” I was in the Tabernacle when he made that speech. 2 Nephi 28:19-22 warns usof false prophets in these latter days, like has been addressed by our monitor about Ezra Taft Benson!
19 For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish; 20 For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good. 21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well—and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell. 22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none—and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.
Why is a Church that teaches continuing revelation so afraid of it?
Lucifer isn’t Heavenly Mother.
The Holy Ghost is.
Where is your proof backing up your claim that the holy ghost is Heavenly Mother? All I have read of yours is an experience that you had in church – that reads exactly like an internal conflict and search for self-importance; instead of anything from god. You clearly lack an understanding of your faith and how god works. Main point being you had no second witness.
As for SDavis claims that you are quickly dismissing. Lucifer being Heavenly mother is a well established knowing within masonic circles. Unfortunately, they worship her like unto what you are attempting to do. Need proof to that affect?? — Search for two words “Lucifer” AND “Masonic” and do your own research.
Where is your proof that Lucifer is Heavenly Mother?
You are making the claim that the holy ghost is heavenly mother – Burden of proof lies with you.
Why not present your evidence?
I am making an unsubstantiated claim in order to highlight the unsubstantiated claims made by SDavis.
Some might call it satire.
Sometimes you win.
Sometimes you learn.
Thank you, Corbin, for your courage and integrity. This is beautiful and powerful. May Mother and Father God open our eyes to see and our ears to hear all that they have in store for us.
Thank you for your kind words, CAS.
My hope is that, through sharing this experience, others may feel similar inspiration to offer similar prayers.
I was in the congregation that day.
It was a good day.
Yes, you were indeed in the congregation that day, Maryann!
And I thought it was a pretty good day, too!
Is that why the Book of Mormon equates the Tree of Life to the Virgin Mary?
The First Shall Be Last (Adam & Jesus) and The Last Shall Be First (Eve & Virgin Mary), as stated by the Prophet Isaiah.
Lehi and Nephi saw the tree of life, meaning that the Virgin Mary would bring forth Heavenly Father in the Flesh (Mosiah 15:1-5), meaning when the Holy Ghost came upon the Virgin Mary and had sex and got her pregnant, then was born Jesus…….THE TREE OF LIFE solely through Him.
You claim the Holy Ghost is Heavenly Mother. Was she a lesbian?
Are you aware of the mistranslation of Isaiah where the word “young woman” was mistranslated as “virgin”?
“Almah” means inherently “young woman” but does not necessarily mean virgin. Young women can be virgins, but aren’t necessarily.
Also, whose to say the “first shall be last and last shall be first” is not a reference to birth order from the pre mortal existence compared to birth order here? Are latter day youth not bombarded with ideas that they are chosen for the last days when things are most difficult? Perhaps a way to spice things up by sending the younger kids first and then the oldest last?
Is that why he was right when he told Adam and Eve they would become like God knowing good and evil when they ate from the Tree of Knowledge?
The serpent begiled Eve and Adam. Adam refused. Eve ate the Tree of Life to DIE because she wanted to come back (Alma 40:5) so she could give birth to the First Born (like what happened when Cain, the first born happened and was taught by Eve) Abel was taught by Adam
But the serpent told Eve the truth.
That is the point I was making.
And it is the point that contradicts your assertion that “Lucifer is totally deceit and false information.”
Mary had a middle name?
And it was the name of a man?
Where are you getting this from, if I may ask?
Computer companies don’t typically translate ancient texts.
Would you care to back up this claim?
Would that be a problem for you?
Thank you for sharing this. I couldn’t help but laugh out loud about the “I hate when God asks me to do hard things comment” because I feel they do the same thing to me all the time.
To not acknowledge her is a great disrespect and something I think Satan wants us to do.
Last time I checked Elohim (at least what I was taught at BYU) is plural because of the -im ending. It is the name shared by both Heavenly Mother and Heavenly Father.
I actually agree that the Holy Spirit is a woman. I have felt impressed of this for a long time. But I do not think it is Heavenly Mother.
I think the Holy Ghost is the counter role to the savior. Because the savior was male, it makes sense for the Holy Ghost to be female.
Thanks for your comments, FEM1.
When Mormons are told they shouldn’t pray to Heavenly Mother, do they think Heavenly Father is okay with that?
And if Heavenly Father is okay with that, what does it say about Heavenly Father?
Nothing appealing, to my mind.
I think this may be another example of people creating God in their own image.
What kind of God would be created by a patriarchal organization that refuses women priesthood leadership?
Probably a God that would get really miffed if anybody prayed to his wife.
Brother Corbin has been cursed up to 4 generations because “other gods” is the wife of Heavenly Father, and in violation of the 10 Commandments! One can only deal directly with the Lord, and NO ONE ELSE!
EXODUS 20:3 “You shall have no other gods before me.
4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.
5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
In 1990 I met with Dan Brown several times after we worked with the Egptian government and translated the Gnostic scrolls (100-300 AD) discovered near the Upper Egyptian town of Nag Hammadi in 1945 , which contents were used for Brown’s 2003 book, The Da Vinci Code.
Mary Magdalene’s real name was Mariamne Arria, heir to the throne of Israel. Her family name was hidden in time, but the truth is she was of royal blood, heir to the throne of Israel, and a righteous leader. She wrote the books of Revelation and the Gospel attributed to the Apostle John. In reality, there was no Apostle named John.
Excerpts proving Mary the Apostle –v Gospel of Mary 10.1-8; 17.7-18.20
Peter said to Mary Magdalene, “Sister, we know that the Savior loved you more than the rest of us. Tell us the words of the Savior which you remember, which you know but we do not, nor have we heard them.” Mary tells them many things Immanuel shared with her about spiritual topics. But Peter gets mad and says, “Did he really speak without our knowledge with a woman and not openly? Are we to turn about and listen to her? Did he prefer her to us?” Then Mary wept and said to Peter, “Brother Peter, what do you think? Do you think that I have thought this up myself, or that I am lying about the Savior?” Levi Matthew interrupts and says, “Peter, you have always been hot tempered. Now I see you contending against her like you do to the adversaries. If the Savior made her worthy, who are you to reject her? The Savior certainly knows her without faltering. That is why he loved her more than us.”
v The Gospel of Philip refers to Immanuel and Mariamne: “The companion (wife) of the Savior is Mary Magdalene. He loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on the mouth. Some of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said to him, “Why do you love her more than all of us?” The Savior answered and said to them “Why do I not love you like her? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. When the light comes then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness.”
v In the Pistis Sophia, Immanuel (Jesus) says, “Mary, you blessed one, who I will perfect in all mysteries, of those of the height, speak in openness, you whose heart is raised to the Kingdom of Heaven more than all your brothers.”
v The Acts of Philip refer to Mariamne: The Acts of Philip (which describes the apostle Philip as the brother of “Mariamne” or “Mariamme”) that Mariamene, or Mariamne, was the actual name of Mary Magdalene. Mary/Mariam was a common name in 1st century Israel, however, not all Marys or Mariams would go by the name Mariamne, a named reserved for the royal family.
Many inconsistencies are obvious when a study is made of the scriptures that speak of her lifetime. The “Beloved Disciple” was added into the text to replace Mary’s name in several places. Some of these examples include:
v Gospel of John 13:23-26 “The disciple whom Jesus loved.” She is sitting with Immanuel during the Last Supper and has her head on his chest when Peter asks her to ask Immanuel for the identity of his betrayer.
v John 19:25-27 The Beloved Disciple is at the foot of the cross along with the mother of Immanuel, and other women including Mary Magdalene. Immanuel tells the Beloved Disciple to take care of his mother. This disciple took his mother into her home. This passage adds “Beloved Disciple” alongside Magdalene in order to infer another person’s presence.
v John 20:1-11 Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved run to the empty tomb after being told by Magdalene that his body was missing. Mary was the first to see Christ had risen. She went back to tell the other disciples like Immanuel told her to do, then ran back with Peter to show him the good news.
v John 21:7 Several disciples are out fishing after Christ’s resurrection. The Beloved Disciple is the first to notice that the man speaking with them was Immanuel.
v John 18:15-16 After the arrest of Immanuel, “the other disciple (Mary)” is allowed to enter the courtyard of the high priest with him. This was because she was his wife and her father was Herod’s son Aristobolus, she was known by the Romans and the priests as one of the royal household.
This brings us to her family tree. Mary’s real name was Mariamne Arria, she was of direct line from Queen Alexandra Salome. Her grandfather was King Herod “the Great.” Her parents were Bernice and Aristobulus IV, the eldest son of Herod the Great and his royal Hasmonean wife Queen Mariamne I. After Aristobulus IV’s recall to Jerusalem from education in Rome, he married Bernice, daughter of Herod’s sister Salome and second husband Costobarus. King Herod executed Aristobulus IV in 7 BCE at the age of 24 leaving five children Josephus refers to as “infants”, one of his children was Mary Magdalene. “Aristobulus IV had Herod Chalcis, Herod Agrippa, and Aristobulus V, his sons, and Herodias and Mariamne, his daughters, all by Bernice, Salome’s daughter.” Josephus, Jewish Wars, Book I 28:1
Her father Aristobulus was murdered by his father Herod in 6 BC, when Mariamne was less than one year old. She was born the same year as Immanuel in 6 BC, the year of “the Massacre of the Innocents” in Bethlehem, recorded in Matthew 2:16. Herod took in Aristobulus’ children which included Mariamne to raise as his own because his conscience bothered him. He prayed that these children would become the rulers of Israel after his death. Little did he know that she would go against him and his planned marriages for her, and marry Immanuel instead.
Mary and Immanuel were equals, the King and Queen of Heaven came to help mankind return to Heaven. The truth about the couple was hidden deeply in the vaults of the Vatican because the men in power could not afford strong women in their ranks. They knew that in order to discredit Magdalene they would have to lie and give her credits to someone close to Immanuel, so they chose his mother, also named Mary.
Immanuel and Mariamne had a daughter, named Sarah in Hebrew and in Latin her name was Mariamne Caerina Arria. Sarah married into the Emperor’s line of the Roman Empire.
The Mariamne of the Acts of Philip is part of the apostolic team with Philip and Bartholomew; she teaches and baptizes. In the beginning, her faith is stronger than Philip’s faith. This portrayal of Mariamne fits very well with the portrayal of Mary of Magdala in the Manichean Psalms, the Gospel of Mary, and Pistis Sophia.
v In Romans 16:6, the Apostle Paul thanks Mariam “who has done much for us.”
Legends say that in Italy Mary Magdalene visited the Emperor Tiberius (who was a relative) and told him about Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. She held up an egg at the dining table and said, “Christ has risen!” Tiberius responded that no one could rise from the dead anymore than the egg she held could turn red. The egg turned red. Tiberius was convinced and by her urging, removed Pilate from Jerusalem to Gaul where he later suffered a terrible illness and painful death. Traditions in France say that Mary, Lazarus, Philip and James arrived on a rudderless boat with a small child.
Why did you have to work with the Egyptian government to translate the Nag Hammadi codices (not scrolls, by the way), when James M. Robinson had already published his famous English translation in 1977?
Back in 1963 my father was summoned back to Ohio at the Hopewell farm. Within a hill on this property were Egyptian artifacts. My father traveled to Egypt and certified them as authentic. These artifacts and several other items and histories (villages throughout Ohio = 300) were displayed at the New York World’s Fair. I had established a relationship with the Egyptian government while I was Assistant to the President, Northrop University next to LAX because many students at the university were from Egypt. Several graduates connected me with key FACTS and EVIDENCE at the Gnostic Museum — far greater than what James M. Robinson was given for his publication! The Hopewell people were the Mulekites who arrived at the Great lakes through the St. Lawrence River and they settled at the Great Lakes. The Niagara Falls were created right after the death of Jesus in Old Jerusalem. This FACT was presented at the NY Fair
The Nag Hammadi codices are housed in the Coptic Museum in Cairo, Egypt.
So I’m guessing there is zero documentation for your claims?
Still waiting for the documentation . . .
For Brother Corbin and anyone else seeking exact proof:
The following website has published copies and histories since 1992 concerning the Hopewell Civilization (Mulekites Nation, 200 BC, totally destroyed before 500 AD – Ohio and Great Lakes area. In grade schools all throughout the Mid-West students are taught about this Pre-Columbia people.
I have personally located 12 caverns (New York to Missouri) containing Mulekite artifacts (from King Solomon’s Temple (1700 cave in Illinois)— check out Volume #3 Issue 16 for the “published” proof
Free Trial Issue
June, 2011 Published book,
Exploring the Book of Mormon in America’s Heartland call them in Provo, Utah 801-429-9751
Several Non-LDS and States have published proof of the Hopewell Civilization
The Hopewell Civilization actually existed, so I am not surprised that many peer-reviewed journals have published on it.
It is the fantastic claims you make regarding the Hopewell Civilization that are not supported in peer-reviewed journals.
Pointing to materials you published yourself is not evidence.
If you actually found the things you claim to have found, others would have published about it.
In peer-reviewed journals.
Can you give me one peer-reviewed journal in which your claims are authenticated?
Then we will have something to talk about.
Is the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation division good enough for you about authenticating and documenting Egyptian and Middle East artifacts found in a cavern back in 1982 by CIA Agent Arn Ufford, Vernal, Utah? Many non-LDS state and federal agents have documented them. This is why school teach students about this culture.
The LDS Church leadership denies it because they are not the ones who have authenticated the discoveries (thousands of Michigan Mound artifacts recovered between 1850-1905 and given to Notre Dame University) were turned over and stored at and LDS owned warehouse in 1963. The LDS Church returned 700 items to a museum in Michigan in 2004.
Three Union Bank of Switzerland (Warburg, UBS) holds three boxes containing ancient gold and other items – currently being returned back to the US (deposited back in 1987)
What would be good enough for me is any respectable peer-reviewed publication documenting the claims you make.
Brother Corbin, You are an attorney and no wonder you doubt things……You were trained as a professional to be loyal to your client.
You must represent Heavenly Mother. Now I got it! lol
You have made extraordinary claims.
I have asked for documentation of those claims.
You have still failed to provide any.
It’s not just because I am an attorney that I doubt.
You are in tune with your faith. So many ask God for direction. So being open to God's will is one thing, listening to the call and then…so many people don't act. You've always been brave. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks so much for your kind words, Carol!
You are one of those rare people who try to seek out the truth regardless of tradition and creeds.
And then to live by the light God has given you.
Thanks for sharing this, Corbin.
Doesn’t it seem silly that any of this is a big deal to anyone? Why are we all holding on to patriarchy so tightly? Why do we have to sweat bullets and have our knees go weak when we consider acknowledging God the Mother in public? Why does the idea of God being a woman send people into fits of [what was all that stuff by sdavis, anyway?]
So, amen to the “small and simple things” idea. And amen to your prayer.
Meolody opened up the next case of special research done by Elder Richard G. Scott back in the 1990s when his wife passed away. Apostle Scott spoke at the BYU and confessed that his wife came to him and told him not to marry another woman because she is equal to him in all eternity! To this date Elder Scott has refused to marry another. At the time of this speech I had just been released as a BYU Bishop and back in 1990 worked very close with Elder Scott because his son’s girlfriend was in my BYU Ward. She confessed in practicing polygamy at the BYU and every week would go to the Provo Temple 4-5X. Elder Scott’s son was involved, so I (after her confession) met BYU Student Mark Zambrano (the leader over 400 BYU students involved) and he believed he was one of the 3 Nephite Disciples. Elder Scott and I kicked all out of the BYU and RM to Agentina Zambrano confessed he had been brainwashed and seduced by his mother (wealthy 1000 Oaks, CA). From that day forward to the present Elder Scott has been the gladiator against treating LDS women as second class people in the LDS Church.
I share this story because the majority of the 2/3 Hosts in Heaven who stayed with the Heavenly Father/Jesus Plan were female spirits/ For 6,000 years (4000 BC – 2000 AD) the Fallen Angel has reigned with blood and horror on this earth, dishonoring women was the total goal by this once “god”.
The evidence is very clear the era of the Resurrected Jesus Christ began April 6, 2000 and the Internet is the force (shouting from the rooftop, as stated by the Prophet Isaiah) blessed to this total earth (Kolob) by the return of the Messiah. Women have been second lass during the reign of Lucifer (ex-wife of HF). because most the 1/3 of the Host sided with her!
2015 is the day of the LDS Woman, receiving equal blessing never shared by the patriarical order of the brethren.
Sure. And what about God the Son advocating our case with God the Father? Was He in direct disobedience to the OT law? Last I checked, Yaveh came to fulfill the law.
The Prophet Alma and Amulek confirmed that the Prophet Abinadi stated to King Noah the Jesus is Heavenly Father in the Fless and there is only One God! (Mosiah 15:1-5)
Amulek debated with an evil attorney (mmmmm) and proved (because an angel told him this message) that Jesus is Heavenly Father (read Alma 11: 21-43)21 And this Zeezrom began to question Amulek, saying: Will ye answer me a few questions which I shall ask you? Now Zeezrom was a man who was expert in the devices of the devil, that he might destroy that which was good; therefore, he said unto Amulek: Will ye answer the questions which I shall put unto you?
22 And Amulek said unto him: Yea, if it be according to the Spirit of the Lord, which is in me; for I shall say nothing which is contrary to the Spirit of the Lord. And Zeezrom said unto him: Behold, here are six onties of silver, and all these will I give thee if thou wilt deny the existence of a Supreme Being.
23 Now Amulek said: O thou child of hell, why tempt ye me? Knowest thou that the righteous yieldeth to no such temptations?
24 Believest thou that there is no God? I say unto you, Nay, thou knowest that there is a God, but thou lovest that lucre more than him.
25 And now thou hast lied before God unto me. Thou saidst unto me—Behold these six onties, which are of great worth, I will give unto thee—when thou hadst it in thy heart to retain them from me; and it was only thy desire that I should deny the true and living God, that thou mightest have cause to destroy me. And now behold, for this great evil thou shalt have thy reward.
26 And Zeezrom said unto him: Thou sayest there is a true and living God?
27 And Amulek said: Yea, there is a true and living God.
28 Now Zeezrom said: Is there more than one God?
29 And he answered, No.
30 Now Zeezrom said unto him again: How knowest thou these things?
31 And he said: An angel hath made them known unto me.
32 And Zeezrom said again: Who is he that shall come? Is it the Son of God?
33 And he said unto him, Yea.
34 And Zeezrom said again: Shall he save his people in their sins? And Amulek answered and said unto him: I say unto you he shall not, for it is impossible for him to deny his word.
35 Now Zeezrom said unto the people: See that ye remember these things; for he said there is but one God; yet he saith that the Son of God shall come, but he shall not save his people—as though he had authority to command God.
36 Now Amulek saith again unto him: Behold thou hast lied, for thou sayest that I spake as though I had authority to command God because I said he shall not save his people in their sins.
37 And I say unto you again that he cannot save them in their sins; for I cannot deny his word, and he hath said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore, how can ye be saved, except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven? Therefore, ye cannot be saved in your sins.
38 Now Zeezrom saith again unto him: Is the Son of God the very Eternal Father?
39 And Amulek said unto him: Yea, he is the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth, and all things which in them are; he is the beginning and the end, the first and the last;
40 And he shall come into the world to redeem his people; and he shall take upon him the transgressions of those who believe on his name; and these are they that shall have eternal life, and salvation cometh to none else.
41 Therefore the wicked remain as though there had been no redemption made, except it be the loosing of the bands of death; for behold, the day cometh that all shall rise from the dead and stand before God, and be judged according to their works.
42 Now, there is a death which is called a temporal death; and the death of Christ shall loose the bands of this temporal death, that all shall be raised from this temporal death.
43 The spirit and the body shall be reunited again in its perfect form; both limb and joint shall be restored to its proper frame, even as we now are at this time; and we shall be brought to stand before God, knowing even as we know now, and have a bright recollection of all our guilt
Joseph Smith taught in the Lectures on Faith that one cannot worship God without having a full understanding of His nature. His nature is defined in the Lectures- particularly the Fifth- and not knowing it brings a damning obstacle to everyone: If one is not praying to God without fully understanding His nature, how can one know he is even praying to God? I dare say that anyone who prays to God without knowing His nature is not praying to Him, but one who has being trying to usurp Him, the same one who has established false gods with delusions of grandeur who proclaim they will save everyone.
As Lucifer is the master of deceit, would she laugh at someone much harder who prayed to her directly or who believed they were praying to God when, instead and without their knowledge, they were praying to her?
As Christ taught in both the Book of Mormon and Bible to pray to the Father, that provides yet another hint that “Heavenly Mother” does not deserve an ounce of recognition or worship due to her role as being Satan.
If you can quote to the Fifth Lecture, you must also know it defines the Godhead as consisting of two individuals; the Father who has a body of spirit, and the Son who has a body of flesh and bones. The Holy Spirit is not a member of the Godhead in the Fifth Lecture, nor even a personage, but only “the mind of God.”
How do you square this with D&C 130?
And you don’t have to have a “full understanding of God’s nature” in order to pray to her.
Any more than you have to have a full understanding of how a cell phone operates to place a call.
Attorney Zeearom, like all modern attorneys, attempted to twist Amulek words for his benefit. At least Zeezrom confessed and asked for forgiveness! 2015 is a great year for the LDS Woman – maybe will get the preisthood, too — like in 1982 by the RLDS in Independence, Missouri There are three women Apostles!
What proof, does Brother Corbin have that Heavenly Mother is the Holy Ghost? There is none.
If one Googles the history of the Royal Masonic Scottish rites ceremony, the 33rd Degree Mason worships the “mother of this Earth – Lucifer”! very well documented
What proof is there of anything anybody has claimed about any of this? Where is your proof of your claims? Proof as in solid, testable, respectable, unquestionable evidence?
But I digress. I don’t really have anything to add to this other than an honest admission that you thoroughly entertain me.
Hi Dusty, and the Corbin Gang of doubters: Because this forum deals with a licensed and bonded attorney of law within the State of Washington, as a Private Investigator since 1992, right after being honorably released as the BYU 26th Ward Bishop, BYU 1st Stake, my family had to sue a local bank (connected to our Orange Julius at the University Mall, open since 1972 when the mall was built) because they embezzled $40,000. Within this case was deposited and recorded thousands of pages of documented proof that Apostles serving on the Zions Bank Board of Directors, earning $80,000/year, are modern day Money-Changers, like those Jesus cast out back in the 30s AD (twice). We were so successful in the law suit, Elders Neal A. Maxwell and Dr. Russell Nelson MD resigned from the Bank Board in December, 1993. Here is your hard core evidence, availa to the general public.
Proof is in the Utah 4th District Court Records, Provo, Utah.
Dr. H. Clyde Davis PhD et al. vs. Zions First National Bank et al., Case Number 930400146
Now Dusty, what proof do you have that Heavenly Father is still married to Heavenly Mother? It is recorded that there was a war in heaven and a vote was taken. Heavenly Father won because 2/3rds (mostly female spirits) voted his wife’s plan OUT! So I guess the scriptures are another proof that Heavenly Mother wanted to SAVE HER CHILDREN from Free Agency!
Where is your honest admission to ignorance?
I’m not sure I fully understand why a Heavenly Mother wanting to save her children from free agency, would then turn on those same children and lead them down to destruction.
Hell hath no fury . . .
I will give you what you ask for. I have made no claims. I don’t know, or have no knowledge of the existence of God let alone if he is even a he rather than a she, or if he/she has a wife.
I could happily make something up that is far more exciting like that time I studied under Professor Tolkein, and we found out that the ancient Nephite ancestors were also connected to middle earth and shared hobbit DNA, thus the only logical conclusion that could be drawn for that is DNA requires a mother, and our mother in Heaven must also currently exist and is neglected by us.
All hail Galadriel!
Steve Davis wrote: The First Shall Be Last (Adam & Jesus) and The Last Shall Be First (Eve & Virgin Mary), as stated by the Prophet Isaiah.
It makes sense. The War in Heaven continues to be played out on earth — If Lucifer (the fallen god) was the wife of Heavenly Father, it makes sense that she (Eve) would be married to Heavenly Father (Adam)
It also makes sense that Mary, the Mother of Jesus, was impregnated by the Holy Ghost, Heavenly Father — Since they were husband and wife.
There is massive and extensive evidence that many cultures and groups worship Lucifer:
The Freemasons secret society with their Luciferic blood oaths (Christ said not to swear at all) — worship a female god (See http://www.womanthouartgod.com/wmbondfreemasonry.php) The secret oaths of freemasonry are like those performed by Wicca.
Native Americans worship Mother Earth.
The Catholics pray to the Mother Mary.
It’s very frightening that many of you on this chat board are justifying praying to Heavenly Mother after learning that her true identity may be Lucifer. Highly dangerous if Steve Davis is right.
Not up to 5 generations?
Looks like I got off easy.
That is exactly what I was thinking as I was writing this, Melody.
Why should this be such a big deal? I think that pretty much all LDS know it is a big deal, but that begs the question as to why it should be.
Why should I have to feel the way I did to offer such a simple prayer at the end of sacrament meeting?
To fill out the story a bit, that is what my wife told me after I offered the prayer. She knew I was wrapped around the axle about giving it, but when it was all said and done, she said, “Well, that wasn’t such a big deal after all.”
Would that more LDS could feel the same way!
If Heavenly Mother is really Lucifer–can’t we at least call her “Lucy”? After all, we are family…
“Lucy! I’m ho-ome!”
That is one scene I would love to see in the new temple endowment.
I think Elder Scott still has some work to do in that regard.
Corbin, I agreed with many of your conclusions in your December 9, 2014 article:
“14 Fundamentals in falsifying the Prophet” (see http://rationalfaiths.com/fourteen-fundamentals-falsifying-prophet/)
Unfortunately, you are in quicksand on this one.
One person’s quicksand is another’s vanilla shake.
Be very afraid.
Because Satan is a broad in the land? (D&C 52:14)
(Sorry. I just couldn’t resist.)
What I am seeing here is a hybrid of the Gnostic myth of a fallen Sophia with the Grand Council in Heaven story of Joseph Smith, coupled with a healthy dose of Adam-God Doctrine from Brigham Young, and sprinkled with a little “The Great Divorce” by C.S. Lewis.
Simmer well till done.
Dr, Letter of the Law,
I am glad you recognize the truth about the printing history of the Original Book of Mormon. In 1837 the Saints ran out of the 5,000 copies printed in 1830 through a mortgage by Martin Harris’ farm. My relative Parley P. Pratt paid for the second printing (3,000 copies). In 1901 Joseph Smith III (RLDS, son of Joseph Smith Jr.) proclaimed the second printing to be the recognized Book of Mormon for the RLDS members.
Joseph Smith III was an attorney (like you) and a 33rd Degree Mason (?).
The difference between the Original and the 1837 printing were over 3,000 changes, including the identify of Lucifer (1 Nephi 11:18) – the Virgin Mary. The LDS printings, over the years contain over 5,500 changes……mostly edited by the “natural man” (always will be an enemy of the Lord (Mosiah 3:19).
So carry on with your four generation curse. You deserve it, but not your posterity.
So does that mean that the natural woman is an ally to God? It’s all starting to add up now. Those 2/3 (mostly female as we all now know) spirits that won the war in heaven are allied with God. And those men, those natural men are always an enemy to the Lord because they tried to hide the truth, and make changes. It’s just too bad my ancestor Samson didn’t figure all this out before he was deceived by Delilah (which is a mistranslation, as the name should have translated into Delbert as the deceiver in this case was an enemy to God and a natural man.)
Why do you discount the 1837 edition of the Book of Mormon when the changes were made by the same person who gave us the 1830 edition?
I have read the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon and have to state for the record (being an attorney and all) that there is absolutely nothing there that even remotely suggests that Lucifer is the Virgin Mary.
You do realize that if that were true, Jesus would have another title in addition to the Son of God?
Book of Mormon scholar Royal Skousen’s research shows:
“The original Book of Mormon manuscript supports the hypothesis that the text was given to Joseph Smith word-for-word and that he could see the spelling of the names (in support of what witnesses of the translation process claimed about Joseph’s translation).”
“The original text is much more consistent and systematic in expression than has ever been realized.”
“Joseph Smith’s editing for the second and third editions (1837 and 1840) represents human editing, not a revealed revision of the text.”
Eye witnesses of the original translation stated:
Joseph Knight (autograph [between 1833 and 1847]):
“But if it was not Spelt rite it would not go away till it was rite, so we see it was marvelous.”
Emma Smith (Edmund Briggs interview, 1856):
“When my husband was translating the Book of Mormon, I wrote a part of it, as he dictated each sentence, word for word, and when he came to proper names he could not pronounce, or long words, he spelled them out, and while I was writing them, if I made a mistake in spelling, he would stop me and correct my spelling, although it was impossible for him to see how I was writing them down at the time.”
Martin Harris (Edward Stevenson’s 1881 account):
“By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin, and when finished he would say, “Written,” and if correctly written, that sentence would disappear and another appear in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used.”
David Whitmer (Eri Mullin interview, 1874):
“…the words would appear, and if he failed to spell the word right, it would stay till it was spelled right, then pass away; another come, and so on.”
Hebrew is “poetic.” This is why Moroni warned in Mormon 9:31-35 not to alter the words because of “imperfection.” The Book of Mormon was written through an Egyptian form because Hebrew would have made the “plates…sufficiently large”. How did Joseph Smith Jr translate these “Egyptian form” of plates into English? — Through the power of God!
The 1837 Edition of the Book of Mormon only altered 1 Nephi 11 & 13 to protect the identify of Lucifer! This happened during the seven bad years of the rule of King Joseph Smith (March, 1844 proclamation – Committee of 50 organization)
The Prophet Abinadi cleared up everything before Alma and his boss, King Noah, why Jesus is Heavenly Father and Jesus, and only ONE GOD, attorney Corbin (like Zeezrom, years later, read Alma 11:22-43 as a second witness becausse Alma was at both confrontations!!!!!). It was very well documented for all Latter Day Saints to see the light! Because if Jesus is Heavenly Father in the Flesh, then who else, except mommy, would take a third of the host (mostly boys) with her?!
Abinadi stated: Mosiah 15: 1-5: “1 And now Abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. 2 And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son— 3 The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son— 4 And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth. 5 And thus the flesh becoming subject to the Spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation, and yieldeth not to the temptation, but suffereth himself to be mocked, and scourged, and cast out, and disowned by his people.”
Wow. These comments have been. . . interesting!
On the Heavenly Mother=Holy Ghost theory, take a look at Margaret Barker’s work. She has some of her papers online to read for free. I’m not an academic and don’t know Hebrew, so it’s slow-going for me; but reading the results of her study has given me hope.
I love Margaret Barker!
Though she is on the fringe of Bible studies, and some of her work has been criticized by more mainstream scholars, I still believe she has many things of value to say.
Like how the female goddess of Wisdom worshipped among the ancient Israelites was cast out of the temple by Jewish reformers(see 1 Enoch); and how elements of the tradition nevertheless show up in the New Testament.
And she is gracious enough to recognize the earlier form of Israelite worship of the Divine Feminine appears in the pages of the Book of Mormon–specifically 1 Nephi 11–where Nephi is told that the Tree of Life is the Divine Feminine as represented by the Virgin Mary.
The Book of Mormon thereby hits on not only this one aspect of ancient but lost Israelite worship, but also makes the connection between the ancient Israelite understanding of the Divine Feminine as represented by the Tree of Life.
The problem with all of this….it all revolves around feelings. The problem is that feelings don’t tell us whether there is a god and they do t tell us whether there is some heavenly mother. The bible, an ancient set of written fables, doesn’t prove God….and doesn’t prove heavenly mother. So in the end all you can rely on us a feeling that God or heavenly mother exist. A strong look at all of this quickly tells us that there is not sufficient evidence for either….and certainly from the perspective of an attorney there is no sufficient evidence to back any of it. I know it probably feels good to pray to heave pinky father and mother but other than provide reassurance to your unreliable feelings what does it really do?
Heavenly Father….not heave pinky father lol.
That is funny, Garrett. At first, I didn’t know if you were calling Heavenly Father a communist or what!
But to your question of what does praying to Heavenly Mother do?
I think, at a minimum, it asserts an equality between men and women–between gods and goddesses.
The LDS Church has introduced the concept of a Heavenly Mother, but has thereafter slowly but surely erased her from the pantheon.
This has happened at the same time as women in the Church have slowly but surely been divested of their rights and privileges.
Praying to Heavenly Mother is an attempt to level the playing field, in heaven as it is on earth.
That is for starters, and depends on no spiritual assumptions.
What do you think?
So anything Joseph Smith did from 1837 on you disagree with?
While I respect your right to your beliefs, you can’t ascribe this to “the seven bad years of the rule of King Joseph Smith,” because he was not anointed King until 1844, as your own citation indicates.
Does that mean you reject anything else Joseph Smith did during the last seven years of his life?
Does that mean you reject baptism for the dead and the other temple ordinances?
Does that mean you reject any revelations in the D&C that date after that period?
Fortunately, it does not mean you have to reject plural marriage because Joseph Smith was already engaged in that with Fanny Alger prior to 1837, per the recent LDS Church essay on the subject.
Joseph of Old did not have the blessings given by the Lord Jesus Christ through baptism, the only required “heavenly action” taught by Jesus before the 2,500 in 3rd Nephi. And all had to be re-baptized, meaning their prior baptism was NOT RECOGNIZED by the Resurrected Jesus Christ. The same will be required during the Millennium == a re-baptism.
Joseph Smith Jr. learned about repentance since his first visit by the Angel Moroni, September 22, 1823. Three straight times he was refused the possession of the Golden Plates, U&T until the right person was present. Finally he repented and had married Emma Hale in January, 1827 and she is the one who was with him when Moroni released the Golden Plates. So how important was a “woman” to the Lord in 1824? Very important because Joseph’s older brother, Alvin had been chosen by Joseph……and he mysteriously died in October, 1823, as a warning the Joseph Smith Jr!
In 1829 Joseph Smith refused to become the First Apostle (D&C 18) and so he desired to be the “prophet”, just like Joseph of Old. So all during his rule (1830-1844) there were 7 good years (as a “king”/prophet) and then 7 bad year as a “kingman”, as warned in Alma 50-52.
When Joseph Smith repented, he was inspired — like when he was able to translate the golden plates through a top hat!
Baptism for the Dead was not required by Joseph Smith in a Temple! This work was done in a lake/river. So Joseph Smith Jr. was blessed to follow the teachings in the Book of Mormon which taught only “baptism” was the required ENDOWMENT for the latter days,m like in the Book of Mormon.
In Conclusion, Joseph Smith was a seer. No one since him has that authority, because my relative Apostle Parley P. Pratt was told by the Lord on July 1, 1844 that Joseph Smith Jr. holds all the keys of the Gospel. This revelation was passed on to the members of the Church and between 1844 – 1848 the Quorum of the 121 ruled — there was no First Presidency. Heber C. and Brigham Young defied that action and only Parley P. Pratt of the original 1835 Quorum of the 12 remained in that capacity. In 1857 Parley P. Pratt was assassinated in Arkansas by Albert Pike, a very close Masonic Buddy to Kimball and Young…….thus a second hit on a person called by the Lord!
No offense, but it is starting to sound like you are making this stuff up.
It is all documented and the Truth will set the IGNORANT free – this has been an excellent discussion
I want you to know that I sincerely appreciate your taking part in it.
All the best to you, Mr. Davis.
Wow, Lee,thanks for the grammar lesson.
And good of you to drop by, my friend.
I was actually aware of this distinction between “thou” and “you,” but only from my relatively recent study of Shakespeare.
In some plays, Shakespeare is actually telling us something about the relationship between characters depending on whether they are addressed by “thou” (familiar) or “you” (formal).
As you mention, not only has this become lost, it has become inverted in modern English usage.
What I had not recognized until you pointed it out was the application this has to Eliza Snow’s hymn, together with the plural versus the singular usage.
I had previously made the argument that the fact she writes of “your mutual approbation” establishes she was speaking of “you” in the plural.
But I think your observations cement the case.
Everybody who has ever sung this hymn has prayed to Heavenly Mother.
Everybody who has publicly joined in the singing of this hymn has publicly prayed to Heavenly Mother.
Whether they knew it or not.
Eliza R. Snow replaced Emma Hale Smith as the General Relief Society President and for years worshipped the Virgin Mary through her polygamy practices — also brainwashed her brother, Lorenzo.
I’m not sure “replaced” is the proper word inasmuch as Brigham Young disbanded the Relief Society after Joseph’s death in 1844 and it was not reconstituted until 1866 when Eliza Snow was appointed the new president.
Not to quibble . . .
I agree with you, it is all about the feeling.
The day Corbin prayed to a Mother God did indeed stir feelings within a few people in the congregation (I was there). I appreciated the satisfied feeling of equality for a brief moment, but it was only a feeling.
However, a distinguished gentleman did not share the same feeling. I noticed his brow pucker as he paced the back aisle like a disturbed cat, he was breathing snide remarks about praying to a female…Oh God forbid we should give her glory.
A day without Heavenly Mother is like a day without sunshine.
Very brave of you, Corbin. Thank you.
I think Lucy could work. Lucifer does mean “light bringer”. Scholars have determined Lucifer is not Satan. If Lucifer were evil, the shortened version of the name, Luke, would have never taken hold and then where would George Lucas be?
Now, to pull up a chair and sit down on the other side of this discussion. I enjoyed the synopsis about Mary Magdalene. I have long maintained that, if she was married to Christ, as we unofficially believe, she could not have just been the girl next door. I have read that there are some scholars who posit that the Gospel of John was actually Mary Magdalene’s gospel and that John ghost wrote. Only theory. No one can prove it, of course. I’ll have to revisit the Gnostic view of Mary Magdalene.
Back to the other side of this argument, Mosiah 8:20
“O how marvelous are the works of the Lord, and how long doth he suffer with his people; yea, and how blind and impenetrable are the understandings of the children of men; for they will not seek wisdom, neither do they desire that she should rule over them!”
Wisdom, in many traditions, is the Queen of Heaven. The lower case spelling can easily be interpreted as the typesetter’s mistake or keeping Heavenly Mother hidden.
Reasons she is hidden? Heavenly Father could have killed her. All of the holy wars in the Old Testament could easily be interpreted as killing Heavenly Mother. As above, so below. Or, having recently emerged from an abusive marriage. Heavenly Father is abusive and one of the first things an abuser does is cut off the victim from communicating with the world, outside. Everyone good and shocked?
I think we should be careful about projecting reasons why Heavenly Mother is hidden. Suffice it to say, in the spirit of setting a divine example of a healthy marriage, Heavenly Mother needs to be brought out of the shadows.
Lastly, a personal opinion on Her nature. I don’t think she is the Holy Ghost. I think She is an exact match and counterpart to Heavenly Father. That’s just me though.
Beautiful, brave action on your part.
Thanks so much for your wonderful comments, Mary.
And especially for bringing out that oh-so-important though oft-overlooked passage from the Book of Mosiah!
Wisdom was definitely viewed among the ancient Jews as a female deity. Ancient texts put her in the beginning with God and describe her as the Creator of all things. I am not talking about off-the-wall ancient texts, either.
I am talking about the Apocrypha–the books God says in the Doctrine and Covenants contain many things that are true. I believe you can find this in the Wisdom of Solomon, though I am going from memory here.
Many scholars believe that early Christians took these attributes of the female deity, Wisdom, and applied them to Jesus.
Hence Jesus came to be understood as existing with God from the beginning, and is described as being the Creator of all things.
Though even Jesus gives a passing reference to Wisdom in Luke 7:35: “But wisdom is justified of all her children.”
And what Galadriel speaks of as happening to the one ring happened to the female deity, Wisdom:
“And some things that should not have been forgotten were lost. History became legend. Legend became myth.”
And now the time has come to bring the female deity, Wisdom, out of obscurity and into the light.
“Who is she that looketh forth as the morning, fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners?” (Song of Solomon 6:10)
It is THIS passage from the Song of Solomon that God says will be fulfilled in the restoration:
“And to none else will I grant this power, to receive this same testimony among this generation, in this the beginning of the rising up and the coming forth of my church out of the wilderness—clear as the moon, and fair as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners.” (D&C 5:14)
The restoration continues to unfold.
And the re-enthronement of Heavenly Mother on a par with Heavenly Father is part of it.
As President Uchtdorf said, “Don’t sleep through the restoration.”
We want to know more!! 🙂
If you want to know more about Heavenly Mother, the one source I CANNOT recommend is the teachings of the current patriarchal leadership of the LDS Church.
They seem to have a vested interest in saying nothing about Heavenly Mother . . . except that we should ignore her.
I know nothing about the Morman Church, but my Catholic Church is no better. I love my Church, but I struggle with its view of women every day as well as its exclusive imageof God as Father. I am teaching a class on Biblical images of God as Mother and other femenine imagery, and there are many. It breaks my heart to see God placed in the box of human metaphor when in reality, God is incomprehensible to us. Thank you for opening dialogue that transcends popular imagery.
I was wondering about the art on this post. I teaching an adult learning class at the universiry where I work entitled “Discovering the Feminine Divine,” and I would love to use the image as the background for my presentation. Do you own the image or can you give me the name of the artist so I can ask for permission to use it? Our local public television station is filming ithe class for online viewing,