My paternal grandmother’s patriarchal blessing states, “Thou wast tutored in the spirit world under the direction of thy Mother in Heaven. She knew what great heights that thou wouldst aspire to in mortality and she tried to prepare thee before you came to mortality.”
My paternal grandmother's patriarchal blessing states, "Thou wast one with thine husband and separated before thy birth and you are tasked to find your master and through him you will be resurrected into his body with all his other wives that you may have world's without end. Should you fail your mission and refuse your Eternal calling you shall, like Emma Smith, be destroyed." So, I guess we're using patriarchal blessing as doctrine now hu?
32:07 Apparently, the phrase "in the Lord," as found in scripture, regularly refers to the state of salvation. If so, that's a pretty good biblical argument for eternal marriage.
I hope you are able to do the 2nd part to this that you illuded to about Heavenly grandparents and what it means for us to be literal children of God (yet we've always existed).
My mom died at age 6 and this different had been especially precious to me. Not only about my own mother's resurrection but getting to know my Heavenly mother. I have a memory of my Heavenly Mother, off Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ! I had on to that!
When you were saying Renlund was not being insulting, why did you intentionally leave out the bit where he said that asking for more information about Heavenly Mother from the Prophets, Seers and Revelators is "arrogant"? You did not fully or fairly represent the reason this upset people. Why should expecting Prophets to do their job about such a fundamentally important doctrine that you recognise has not been addressed enough by the prophets and apostles be disparaged as arrogant and too much to ask of people claiming to be successors of Joseph Smith who asked questions and got answers about every tiny thing every five minutes according to our scriptures and history? Full disclosure will keep you more credible. Be honest about what he really said and how he said it please.
to what i can glean the earliest mentions which you have touched on showing that she not really a separate but an aspect or person and an element of the farther basically it sound prity much like the Kabbalistic notion of the shekhinah
sounds to me like it's based on an attempt to justify plural marriages but the "God's spouse" idea is attempt to humanize God's existance yet the Trinity shows "Corporate God" being called "Father, Son, Holy Spirit" is beyond the sexualized idea. GOD CREATED makes "Corporate God" above carnal ideas.
I love your content! It's refreshing to hear you address difficult and challenging issues that people may face in the church without letting it destroy your testimony. I find myself agreeing with you on most videos you have put out. I just want to share something with you. You mentioned in this video that you were going to do a video on the plurality of Gods and eternal progression. I am undecided on this topic. I do believe in eternal progression that we will advance as immortal divine beings and become heirs of the kingdom but that does not necessarily mean we will become a God like God the Father or like his Son Jesus Christ. I think godlike with a small g would be more appropriate but I don't think we will ever become like God the Father with the same glory and power. We know that Jesus is the only one known in scripture to create worlds without end under the direction of his Father and yet he said my Father is greater than I. Even Jesus is subservient to his Father and gives all glory to his Father. Therefore no matter how far we progress we will always be subserviant to the Father Son and Holy Spirit and everything we do will be to give glory to them. That order will never change. When I was looking into the King Follett Discourse someone shared this with me which made me question weather we should take everything written from the King Follet Discourse as an authoritive Teaching of Joseph Smith. Here is what he shared with me about the King Follet Discourse: and I quote: "The first has to do with joseph reportedly teaching the concept of many gods, As the following extract demonstrates: " you have got to learn how to be god's yourselves; To be kings and priests to god the same as all gods have done; by going from a small degree to another, from grace to grace from exaltation to exaltation, until you're able, To sit and glory as those who sit in throne in everlasting power" ( Times and Seasons Vol. V, p. 614) There are several problems surrounding this sermon. The first is that the excerpt just quoted is contrary to the established word of god in the bible, the Book of Mormon and the revelations approved by the church during the life of joseph Smith. The second problem has to do with when the sermon was first published. Joseph was to have preached this Sermon On April 7, 1844. Joseph smith was killed on June of 1844, and the first printing of this sermon occurred August of 1844, 2 months after joseph smith's death. As a result He was not in a position to either affirm or deny its contents. The third problem centers around a statement found in the history as recorded by the utah Is church which states: It must be remembered that the above report of the prophet's remarks, As also the report of the king Follett Discourse ( preached in April 1844, and which will appear in volume 5 of this history ) ... we're Reported in long hand and from memory, So that they are very likely to contain inaccuracies and convey wrong impressions. ( History of the church, Vol. 4 p. 556) The fourth and final problem has to do with the Is testimony of jJames Whitehead, Joseph smith's personal secretary who is in the congregation when the sermon was preached. He testified that. I heard what is known as the "King Follett" sermon preached. Is that sermon was published. Joseph smith and that sermon did not teach the plurality of gods. (Compainants abstract of pleading and evidence, Herald Publishing House, Lamoni, IA, 1893 p. 37 ) When all of this Information regarding the King Follett Discourse is considered, It would be suspect at best to consider this an authoritative teaching of joseph smith. " I know the official narrative of the King Follet Discoarse came from notes that were written down that day. I don't have time to do research on this but if you want to do more research into this, It would be interesting to see what you find out because so many christians outside our church use the King Follet Discourse as evidence that Latter Day Saints are not christians and that Joseph Smith was a false prophet.
I find it quite presumptuous to tell us God consists of both male and female, but then forbid us to pray to both of them. Jesus taught us to pray to the Father, but then in the same chapter (3 Nephi 19) he allowed and approved of those same people praying to HIM(Jesus). We can pray to God. Jesus is God. The father is God. The Mother is God.
I think there is a Heavenly mother (or even dare say mothers). Her name is probably not mentioned as much (and other details) to keep her persona sacred, protected and out of the limelight. (I guess we will all eventually learn more though).
There is a good reason for that. Would any man want his wife/eternal companion's name to be taken in vain? Used as a swear word, or misguided worship. Look at Mary, and how corrupt that has all become....and she was favored above all women.
Did you really just say what you said about priesthood? (About half way through) Priesthood is not an exclusively male power. You should do a deep dive on priesthood and women and all of that history. Heavenly mother absolutely has priesthood power. She is a God. Priesthood is the power of God. Why do you think doctrine only comes from revelation? And what do you consider revelations? If the proclamation was revelation then it is doctrine that we have heavenly mother because heavenly parents is mentioned. But you are so critical about this being doctrine. Why? I hope you choose to dig more into this. I’ve learned a lot as I’ve researched and prayed and I think you could too
The quote he shared fits in with other very sexist quotes from church leaders around that time (Lorenzo Snow saying it is much more difficult for wives to learn than their husbands 🤦🏼♀️). Which is why I don't take much stock in it.
You’ll have to remind me what I said, I don’t recall. Yes priesthood is God’s power and HM is a goddess. HF said that his honor is his power so presumably it works the same from her. We just don’t have knowledge as to how and when she wields that power. How else can true doctrine be established other than revelation? We must know what is true and that comes from God. We can reason things and have high confidence in our beliefs but I might call that speculative or rational doctrine as opposed to revealed doctrine. The Proclamation wasn’t revelation. But it is (a type of) doctrine.
@@cboyack I'm not the original commenter, but the quote I'm referring to from your video is George Q Cannon from i think the 1890s that said "no idea was conveyed that any such [feminine] element “was equal in power and glory with the masculine.”"
I think it sort of depends on what Jesus Christ specifically said when He gave His pattern for prayer. If he used the term "Elohim" which became translated as "Father in Heaven", then that pluralized term for God would be fundamentally inclusive of our Mother in Heaven by implication. As it stands, I think there are two primary reasons that we're counseled against prayer directly to our Mother in Heaven; 1) we have no prescribed pattern, we basically don't know the ordinance and we can't be going willy-nilly doing ordinances of our own design, such a thing might actually be highly offensive to Her and 2) the people advocating it are rabble rousing feminist types that wouldn't be satisfied with any revelation regarding Her, they aren't seeking knowledge, they're pre-supposing the practices and acting on their own dictates and designs. People that are sincere would be seeking revelation on their own and obeying the strict commandment to keep it to themselves. In fact, I think if any revelation of the mysteries comes to regular members of the Church, if they have not received the strict command, then that revelation didn't come from God.
@@wufflerdance9481 Emma Smith, to her death, defended Joseph and said he was never involved in polygamy. Her and Joseph's son Joseph III did too. beyond that, I don't take the opinions of descendants who didn't even personally know their ancestor much more seriously than anybody else's.
I've always been taught that the purpose of prayer is to communicate with God. To build a relationship with Him. To come to know him. So if that's the purpose of prayer, I see Zero problem with doing all that with BOTH of our heavenly parents. Never have a learned that it has anything to do with priesthood, or who is ruling or presiding or whatever. Connor, I don't really understand your dismissiveness toward those who want to recognize Heavenly Mother.
@@cboyack that's just fine. But how is it "inappropriate" for someone who feels a need to connect with her? I'm just trying to understand your reasoning? If she's there and just as real and divine as the Father, then it should be just as acceptable and rational for someone to want and need to connect with her as it is with The Father.
@@cboyack so why do you feel the need to pray to the Father? Can't you just recognize his existence and move along? Why do you think Jesus taught us to pray?
@@littled6698 yes, why do you think he taught us to pray to the Father? What is the purpose of prayer? Also, why do you think Jesus didn't tell the people to stop when they were praying to him? Or why was it acceptable for others throughout scripture to pray to Jesus?
We don't Pray to Jesus either, but that doesn't denigrate or take anything away from Him either. There is always an order in things even if we don't completely understand that order.
@@TheGreatDadoo This is from the Church website under FAQ's explaining what we believe - "While Latter-day Saints do worship Jesus Christ as explained here, they do not pray to Him. That is reserved for only God the Father." We pray to God the Father in the name of Jesus. He is always our mediator. That is why we address our Father at the beginning of our prayers and end in Jesus Christ's name.
@@refreshingdesignsjewelry here, let me quote you from the book you don't seem to care about: 17 And it came to pass that when they had all knelt down upon the earth, he commanded his disciples that they should pray. 18 And behold, they began to pray; and they did pray unto Jesus, calling him their Lord and their God. 25 And it came to pass that Jesus blessed them as they did pray unto him; and his acountenance did smile upon them, and the light of his bcountenance did cshine upon them, and behold they were as dwhite as the countenance and also the garments of Jesus; and behold the whiteness thereof did exceed all the whiteness, yea, even there could be nothing upon earth so white as the whiteness thereof. 26 And Jesus said unto them: Pray on; nevertheless they did not cease to pray. 30 And when Jesus had spoken these words he came again unto his disciples; and behold they did pray steadfastly, without ceasing, unto him; and he did smile upon them again; and behold they were awhite, even as Jesus. but, yeah, people like you throw the scriptures in the dumpster once someone who's not dead says something. homos get married in the temple now? the church website says it's okay, so i believe it and support it!!! nice... simple minded simp
The Father, Son and Holy Ghost comprise the Godhead. The Holy Ghost is, possibly, a female personage, given as how the Hebrew Bible speaks of the Spirit in _the feminine_ gender. If the Holy Ghost is, indeed, a female personage, and is a mother, or even is the very mother of our spirits, it would still not be correct to refer to the Holy Ghost as our _heavenly_ mother because the Holy Ghost strives with mankind here on _earth_ , trying to get us saved, sanctified, justified, purified and exalted, with the same care that a mother hen has over her chicks. So, even if the reasoning of the LDS seems and sounds right, without actual revelation on this issue, it should be considered one of the _mysteries of God_ , and no mystery of God can ever be revealed through reason alone. So the LDS are most likely wrong about their idea of a heavenly mother. One last thing, the word "goddess" isn't found in the revelations. An exalted man and his exalted wife are called _gods_ in the scriptures, _not_ god and goddess.
I like talking TO Her like i like talking to my grandpa and grandma who have passed. I don't think there's anything wrong with that as long as I turn to God and Jesus in my prayers
Do you really want to know the truth about mothers in heaven. Do you want a revelation? I can give you that. Thus says the Lord Jesus Christ; "In the first forever before there was spiritual or physical creation, there was Elohim. Elohim is the unity of all the EL light beings in the universe. EL beings are male. During the first forever, we, Elohim, created all things virtually and when we had created all things virtually, we sought out the light and knowledge to bring about the spiritual creation. The light to create spiritually is called the light of Life. EL beings are equal in all ways except in brightness. Those who are of the highest frequency of light and who diligently add to the light of their being become brighter than all others. When an EL being becomes a Father in Heaven, to begin his ministry to create spiritual EL beings, he seeks out the brightest of the bright and gives to him the light of life. I, the Lord Jesus, am the one that my Father found and became the first born spiritually of our generation of spirits and to be his only begotten son in this generation, and gave to me the light of life to give to everybody else. I was the only one born spiritually of my Father. He gave to me authority to give the light of spiritual creation to all the other EL beings in our generation of spirits. After the EL beings in our generation had been given the light of spiritual creation, there was the council of the EL to plan out the physical creation of Stars and planets in the Father's Kingdom. After work began on the formation of stars and planets, I gave the light of life to human beings, male and female. There is no spiritual mother in Heaven. That is not to say that my father does not have wives and other physical children like myself. Michael, who became Adam, is my son spiritually but my half brother physically. We have different mothers." There is more to this revelation than this. If you want more, let me know.
"The First Forever" you say? Was that in the long-long olden-times ago where we were all super-super nice-nice and stuff and didn't just like each other but really like-liked each other?
@@TheGreatDadoo All of forever can be divided into three parts. 1. The first forever was before there was any spiritual or physical creation. In that forever, we existed as single celled, intelligent, self aware light beings. 2. It has been forever since the beginning of the Physical creation. This is the second forever. 3. The third forever is from now into the future.
Poorly done, bro. Start at the beginning and you can unwind this mystery better. In the beginning there was Michael, not Adam. Adam came AFTER the "rib" and woman was taken from "him". Our language is silly here. Him and Man is used to mean "The way God is" and we do not know if Michael had a penis or what. But, Michael was a HE and Adam was also called a HE but we don't know what that means. We do know "Man" means "mankind" which means mean and women and Michael's... ya know, the combo-man/woman thing that God is. Anyone ever seen a resurrected woman? Nope. Can a woman be resurrected without a man? Nope. Does a resurrected woman resurrect independently or is she reunited with the "Michael" body? Well, scriptures suggest that's the way it is. Man is not without the woman nor is woman without the man. What's this mean? Well, who knows what ANY of it means! So much for "The fullness of the gospel" once again nothing makes sense. But, what we do think we know is that God is complete but we are not. Does Elohim have a penis? We don't know. Is "He" a "Man"? Yes. Are women also men? Yes. Men is a general term... made that way intentionally to confuse us so as to make religion a Rubik's Cube of confusion and frustration. Fun, hu? From God's perspective, what is a woman? Well, I guess she's a rib. We know that, whatever that means. She's also the "lesser". Now, that we do understand. Eve, the lesser, sinned and Adam, the greater, was checkmated into sinning. Eve, the lesser, was "beguiled" but Adam, the greater, regretfully partook knowing he was dooming himself to spiritual death and hell all thanks to Eve's "lesser" nature dragging "him" down. But Eve was taken FROM Michael and the greater became Adam and the lesser Eve... so he was checkmated by the lesser part of himself. Then comes in the "doctrine" of Adam/God (which should be called Michael/God IMHO but I KNOW JACK SH*T about ANYTHING since I forgot seem to have lost my magic decoder ring in the war in heaven) which means Elohim was split into Adam and then Eve taken from him in some magical "rib" referencing way take makes no sense at all. A yin/yang type thing I guess but that's just a guess 'cause I'm pretty sure we are SUPPOSED to be totally confused by all of this. Ya know, the same way that Eve and Adam, in that order, "Transgressed" but didn't "sin" even though "transgressed" MEANS "sinned" even thought neither Adam nor Eve had any ability to sin OR transgress as they were INNOCENT and could do nothing against God. Confused yet? Yeah... so it the prophet! Bottom line: We don't know and no fun little funeral song that some "woman" wrote make "Mother in Heaven" real. Maybe only men are resurrected and the spirits of women (whatever that means) that came from men (whatever collective that entails) is magnetically gravitated to the "male" resurrected being so as to "complete" and "perfect" the lesser/weaker? Maybe a lot of men don't want to attain their split-buddy "weakness" doppelganger so they live as perfect MEN (now this one has a penis and are like we males here on earth, we can kind of be sure) but live as angels to Gods and are not Gods themselves as Gods are the rib-mix-reunion thing attained after resurrection. Right? Yet, we live in this insane "All men (which means everybody even though it USED to mean those with a penis) are created equal (whatever that means!)" from the US constitution and we just decide that's a fact even though Jesus was a "man" (whatever that means) and we all admit that "He" is better than we are since he was 1/2 man and 1/2 Elohim and we are 100% man even though man is either the literal sons of Michael who is Elohim OR Elohim is the 100% son of Elohim which means we are directly 100% from Elohim which makes us 100% like Jesus but for some reason Jesus, we all agree, is better than we are ... so much for all men being equal? Yeah, it's a big, fat mess and the church leaders refuse to clear any of it up because they are just as clueless as the rest of us. So, we say, "Well hey, you're worth hundreds of billions of dollars of our tithing money - pray about it and get an answer; we deserve at least that much, right?" and they say, "yeah, we try and the best we can do is tell you women are neat-o and there's probably a heavenly mother and if you wanna believe in Santa Clause we think that's keen-o and if you think, like Joe Biden, that the heart of America and all just morality lies in the hear of the transgender community, well, we sure won't disagree with you there either! Oh, and hey, let's give millions of dollars to the NAACP while we're at it!" yeah, welcome to hell - don't expect the church to clear any of this up ... now shut up and give us 10% or you'll burn!!!
you can not be a father without a wife being a mother
wow... that's the dumbest comment ever
My paternal grandmother’s patriarchal blessing states, “Thou wast tutored in the spirit world under the direction of thy Mother in Heaven. She knew what great heights that thou wouldst aspire to in mortality and she tried to prepare thee before you came to mortality.”
My paternal grandmother's patriarchal blessing states, "Thou wast one with thine husband and separated before thy birth and you are tasked to find your master and through him you will be resurrected into his body with all his other wives that you may have world's without end. Should you fail your mission and refuse your Eternal calling you shall, like Emma Smith, be destroyed."
So, I guess we're using patriarchal blessing as doctrine now hu?
Not true
32:07 Apparently, the phrase "in the Lord," as found in scripture, regularly refers to the state of salvation. If so, that's a pretty good biblical argument for eternal marriage.
Good to lean into what makes us unique.yes.!!!🎉
I hope you are able to do the 2nd part to this that you illuded to about Heavenly grandparents and what it means for us to be literal children of God (yet we've always existed).
My mom died at age 6 and this different had been especially precious to me. Not only about my own mother's resurrection but getting to know my Heavenly mother. I have a memory of my Heavenly Mother, off Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ! I had on to that!
wow... your mom had kids at a super young age! Amazing! But kids under 5 should not be having sex IMHO... but that's just prudish ol' me
Gospel Tangents has great vid on heavenly mother in scripture.
When you were saying Renlund was not being insulting, why did you intentionally leave out the bit where he said that asking for more information about Heavenly Mother from the Prophets, Seers and Revelators is "arrogant"? You did not fully or fairly represent the reason this upset people. Why should expecting Prophets to do their job about such a fundamentally important doctrine that you recognise has not been addressed enough by the prophets and apostles be disparaged as arrogant and too much to ask of people claiming to be successors of Joseph Smith who asked questions and got answers about every tiny thing every five minutes according to our scriptures and history? Full disclosure will keep you more credible. Be honest about what he really said and how he said it please.
to what i can glean the earliest mentions which you have touched on showing that she not really a separate but an aspect or person and an element of the farther basically it sound prity much like the Kabbalistic notion of the shekhinah
sounds to me like it's based on an attempt to justify plural marriages
but the "God's spouse" idea is attempt to humanize God's existance
yet the Trinity shows "Corporate God" being called "Father, Son, Holy Spirit" is beyond the sexualized idea. GOD CREATED makes "Corporate God" above carnal ideas.
*How many spirit mommies? If 50 Billion kids per planet, how many mommies are required?*
I love your content! It's refreshing to hear you address difficult and challenging issues that people may face in the church without letting it destroy your testimony. I find myself agreeing with you on most videos you have put out.
I just want to share something with you. You mentioned in this video that you were going to do a video on the plurality of Gods and eternal progression. I am undecided on this topic. I do believe in eternal progression that we will advance as immortal divine beings and become heirs of the kingdom but that does not necessarily mean we will become a God like God the Father or like his Son Jesus Christ. I think godlike with a small g would be more appropriate but I don't think we will ever become like God the Father with the same glory and power. We know that Jesus is the only one known in scripture to create worlds without end under the direction of his Father and yet he said my Father is greater than I. Even Jesus is subservient to his Father and gives all glory to his Father. Therefore no matter how far we progress we will always be subserviant to the Father Son and Holy Spirit and everything we do will be to give glory to them. That order will never change.
When I was looking into the King Follett Discourse someone shared this with me which made me question weather we should take everything written from the King Follet Discourse as an authoritive Teaching of Joseph Smith. Here is what he shared with me about the King Follet Discourse:
and I quote:
"The first has to do with joseph reportedly teaching the concept of many gods, As the following extract demonstrates: " you have got to learn how to be god's yourselves; To be kings and priests to god the same as all gods have done; by going from a small degree to another, from grace to grace from exaltation to exaltation, until you're able, To sit and glory as those who sit in throne in everlasting power" ( Times and Seasons Vol. V, p. 614)
There are several problems surrounding this sermon. The first is that the excerpt just quoted is contrary to the established word of god in the bible, the Book of Mormon and the revelations approved by the church during the life of joseph Smith. The second problem has to do with when the sermon was first published. Joseph was to have preached this Sermon On April 7, 1844. Joseph smith was killed on June of 1844, and the first printing of this sermon occurred August of 1844, 2 months after joseph smith's death.
As a result He was not in a position to either affirm or deny its contents. The third problem centers around a statement found in the history as recorded by the utah Is church which states:
It must be remembered that the above report of the prophet's remarks, As also the report of the king Follett Discourse ( preached in April 1844, and which will appear in volume 5 of this history ) ... we're Reported in long hand and from memory, So that they are very likely to contain inaccuracies and convey wrong impressions.
( History of the church, Vol. 4 p. 556)
The fourth and final problem has to do with the Is testimony of jJames Whitehead, Joseph smith's personal secretary who is in the congregation when the sermon was preached.
He testified that. I heard what is known as the "King Follett" sermon preached. Is that sermon was published. Joseph smith and that sermon did not teach the plurality of gods. (Compainants abstract of pleading and evidence, Herald Publishing House, Lamoni, IA, 1893 p. 37 )
When all of this Information regarding the King Follett Discourse is considered, It would be suspect at best to consider this an authoritative teaching of joseph smith. "
I know the official narrative of the King Follet Discoarse came from notes that were written down that day. I don't have time to do research on this but if you want to do more research into this, It would be interesting to see what you find out because so many christians outside our church use the King Follet Discourse as evidence that Latter Day Saints are not christians and that Joseph Smith was a false prophet.
I find it quite presumptuous to tell us God consists of both male and female, but then forbid us to pray to both of them.
Jesus taught us to pray to the Father, but then in the same chapter (3 Nephi 19) he allowed and approved of those same people praying to HIM(Jesus). We can pray to God. Jesus is God. The father is God. The Mother is God.
I think there is a Heavenly mother (or even dare say mothers). Her name is probably not mentioned as much (and other details) to keep her persona sacred, protected and out of the limelight. (I guess we will all eventually learn more though).
There is a good reason for that. Would any man want his wife/eternal companion's name to be taken in vain? Used as a swear word, or misguided worship. Look at Mary, and how corrupt that has all become....and she was favored above all women.
What is the big deal with the middle initial?
Did you really just say what you said about priesthood? (About half way through) Priesthood is not an exclusively male power. You should do a deep dive on priesthood and women and all of that history. Heavenly mother absolutely has priesthood power. She is a God. Priesthood is the power of God.
Why do you think doctrine only comes from revelation? And what do you consider revelations? If the proclamation was revelation then it is doctrine that we have heavenly mother because heavenly parents is mentioned.
But you are so critical about this being doctrine. Why?
I hope you choose to dig more into this. I’ve learned a lot as I’ve researched and prayed and I think you could too
The quote he shared fits in with other very sexist quotes from church leaders around that time (Lorenzo Snow saying it is much more difficult for wives to learn than their husbands 🤦🏼♀️). Which is why I don't take much stock in it.
You’ll have to remind me what I said, I don’t recall. Yes priesthood is God’s power and HM is a goddess. HF said that his honor is his power so presumably it works the same from her. We just don’t have knowledge as to how and when she wields that power.
How else can true doctrine be established other than revelation? We must know what is true and that comes from God. We can reason things and have high confidence in our beliefs but I might call that speculative or rational doctrine as opposed to revealed doctrine.
The Proclamation wasn’t revelation. But it is (a type of) doctrine.
@@cboyack I'm not the original commenter, but the quote I'm referring to from your video is George Q Cannon from i think the 1890s that said "no idea was conveyed that any such [feminine] element “was equal in power and glory with the masculine.”"
stoopiiid feminist bullsh*t
I think it sort of depends on what Jesus Christ specifically said when He gave His pattern for prayer. If he used the term "Elohim" which became translated as "Father in Heaven", then that pluralized term for God would be fundamentally inclusive of our Mother in Heaven by implication. As it stands, I think there are two primary reasons that we're counseled against prayer directly to our Mother in Heaven; 1) we have no prescribed pattern, we basically don't know the ordinance and we can't be going willy-nilly doing ordinances of our own design, such a thing might actually be highly offensive to Her and 2) the people advocating it are rabble rousing feminist types that wouldn't be satisfied with any revelation regarding Her, they aren't seeking knowledge, they're pre-supposing the practices and acting on their own dictates and designs. People that are sincere would be seeking revelation on their own and obeying the strict commandment to keep it to themselves. In fact, I think if any revelation of the mysteries comes to regular members of the Church, if they have not received the strict command, then that revelation didn't come from God.
3:05 I'm gonna stop you right there. Eliza Snow was a liar. Joseph's only wife was Emma. Period.
wrong...even emma smith qnd her decendents support the history of joseph having plural wives...yoy may not like it but it did happen
@@wufflerdance9481 Emma Smith, to her death, defended Joseph and said he was never involved in polygamy. Her and Joseph's son Joseph III did too. beyond that, I don't take the opinions of descendants who didn't even personally know their ancestor much more seriously than anybody else's.
I've always been taught that the purpose of prayer is to communicate with God. To build a relationship with Him. To come to know him. So if that's the purpose of prayer, I see Zero problem with doing all that with BOTH of our heavenly parents. Never have a learned that it has anything to do with priesthood, or who is ruling or presiding or whatever. Connor, I don't really understand your dismissiveness toward those who want to recognize Heavenly Mother.
I recognize her. That doesn’t mean I need to pray to her to do so.
@@cboyack that's just fine. But how is it "inappropriate" for someone who feels a need to connect with her? I'm just trying to understand your reasoning? If she's there and just as real and divine as the Father, then it should be just as acceptable and rational for someone to want and need to connect with her as it is with The Father.
@@cboyack so why do you feel the need to pray to the Father? Can't you just recognize his existence and move along? Why do you think Jesus taught us to pray?
@@ekh1821Didn't He teach us to pray to Heavenly Father?
@@littled6698 yes, why do you think he taught us to pray to the Father? What is the purpose of prayer?
Also, why do you think Jesus didn't tell the people to stop when they were praying to him? Or why was it acceptable for others throughout scripture to pray to Jesus?
We don't Pray to Jesus either, but that doesn't denigrate or take anything away from Him either. There is always an order in things even if we don't completely understand that order.
sure we pray to Jesus... it's right there in 3 Nephi
@@TheGreatDadoo This is from the Church website under FAQ's explaining what we believe - "While Latter-day Saints do worship Jesus Christ as explained here, they do not pray to Him. That is reserved for only God the Father."
We pray to God the Father in the name of Jesus. He is always our mediator. That is why we address our Father at the beginning of our prayers and end in Jesus Christ's name.
@@refreshingdesignsjewelry here, let me quote you from the book you don't seem to care about:
17 And it came to pass that when they had all knelt down upon the earth, he commanded his disciples that they should pray.
18 And behold, they began to pray; and they did pray unto Jesus, calling him their Lord and their God.
25 And it came to pass that Jesus blessed them as they did pray unto him; and his acountenance did smile upon them, and the light of his bcountenance did cshine upon them, and behold they were as dwhite as the countenance and also the garments of Jesus; and behold the whiteness thereof did exceed all the whiteness, yea, even there could be nothing upon earth so white as the whiteness thereof.
26 And Jesus said unto them: Pray on; nevertheless they did not cease to pray.
30 And when Jesus had spoken these words he came again unto his disciples; and behold they did pray steadfastly, without ceasing, unto him; and he did smile upon them again; and behold they were awhite, even as Jesus.
but, yeah, people like you throw the scriptures in the dumpster once someone who's not dead says something. homos get married in the temple now? the church website says it's okay, so i believe it and support it!!! nice... simple minded simp
The Father, Son and Holy Ghost comprise the Godhead. The Holy Ghost is, possibly, a female personage, given as how the Hebrew Bible speaks of the Spirit in _the feminine_ gender. If the Holy Ghost is, indeed, a female personage, and is a mother, or even is the very mother of our spirits, it would still not be correct to refer to the Holy Ghost as our _heavenly_ mother because the Holy Ghost strives with mankind here on _earth_ , trying to get us saved, sanctified, justified, purified and exalted, with the same care that a mother hen has over her chicks. So, even if the reasoning of the LDS seems and sounds right, without actual revelation on this issue, it should be considered one of the _mysteries of God_ , and no mystery of God can ever be revealed through reason alone. So the LDS are most likely wrong about their idea of a heavenly mother.
One last thing, the word "goddess" isn't found in the revelations. An exalted man and his exalted wife are called _gods_ in the scriptures, _not_ god and goddess.
I like talking TO Her like i like talking to my grandpa and grandma who have passed. I don't think there's anything wrong with that as long as I turn to God and Jesus in my prayers
Do you really want to know the truth about mothers in heaven. Do you want a revelation? I can give you that. Thus says the Lord Jesus Christ; "In the first forever before there was spiritual or physical creation, there was Elohim. Elohim is the unity of all the EL light beings in the universe. EL beings are male. During the first forever, we, Elohim, created all things virtually and when we had created all things virtually, we sought out the light and knowledge to bring about the spiritual creation. The light to create spiritually is called the light of Life. EL beings are equal in all ways except in brightness. Those who are of the highest frequency of light and who diligently add to the light of their being become brighter than all others. When an EL being becomes a Father in Heaven, to begin his ministry to create spiritual EL beings, he seeks out the brightest of the bright and gives to him the light of life. I, the Lord Jesus, am the one that my Father found and became the first born spiritually of our generation of spirits and to be his only begotten son in this generation, and gave to me the light of life to give to everybody else. I was the only one born spiritually of my Father. He gave to me authority to give the light of spiritual creation to all the other EL beings in our generation of spirits. After the EL beings in our generation had been given the light of spiritual creation, there was the council of the EL to plan out the physical creation of Stars and planets in the Father's Kingdom. After work began on the formation of stars and planets, I gave the light of life to human beings, male and female. There is no spiritual mother in Heaven. That is not to say that my father does not have wives and other physical children like myself. Michael, who became Adam, is my son spiritually but my half brother physically. We have different mothers." There is more to this revelation than this. If you want more, let me know.
"The First Forever" you say? Was that in the long-long olden-times ago where we were all super-super nice-nice and stuff and didn't just like each other but really like-liked each other?
@@TheGreatDadoo All of forever can be divided into three parts. 1. The first forever was before there was any spiritual or physical creation. In that forever, we existed as single celled, intelligent, self aware light beings. 2. It has been forever since the beginning of the Physical creation. This is the second forever. 3. The third forever is from now into the future.
Poorly done, bro. Start at the beginning and you can unwind this mystery better.
In the beginning there was Michael, not Adam. Adam came AFTER the "rib" and woman was taken from "him".
Our language is silly here. Him and Man is used to mean "The way God is" and we do not know if Michael had a penis or what. But, Michael was a HE and Adam was also called a HE but we don't know what that means. We do know "Man" means "mankind" which means mean and women and Michael's... ya know, the combo-man/woman thing that God is.
Anyone ever seen a resurrected woman? Nope. Can a woman be resurrected without a man? Nope. Does a resurrected woman resurrect independently or is she reunited with the "Michael" body? Well, scriptures suggest that's the way it is.
Man is not without the woman nor is woman without the man. What's this mean? Well, who knows what ANY of it means! So much for "The fullness of the gospel" once again nothing makes sense. But, what we do think we know is that God is complete but we are not. Does Elohim have a penis? We don't know. Is "He" a "Man"? Yes. Are women also men? Yes. Men is a general term... made that way intentionally to confuse us so as to make religion a Rubik's Cube of confusion and frustration. Fun, hu?
From God's perspective, what is a woman? Well, I guess she's a rib. We know that, whatever that means. She's also the "lesser". Now, that we do understand. Eve, the lesser, sinned and Adam, the greater, was checkmated into sinning. Eve, the lesser, was "beguiled" but Adam, the greater, regretfully partook knowing he was dooming himself to spiritual death and hell all thanks to Eve's "lesser" nature dragging "him" down.
But Eve was taken FROM Michael and the greater became Adam and the lesser Eve... so he was checkmated by the lesser part of himself.
Then comes in the "doctrine" of Adam/God (which should be called Michael/God IMHO but I KNOW JACK SH*T about ANYTHING since I forgot seem to have lost my magic decoder ring in the war in heaven) which means Elohim was split into Adam and then Eve taken from him in some magical "rib" referencing way take makes no sense at all. A yin/yang type thing I guess but that's just a guess 'cause I'm pretty sure we are SUPPOSED to be totally confused by all of this.
Ya know, the same way that Eve and Adam, in that order, "Transgressed" but didn't "sin" even though "transgressed" MEANS "sinned" even thought neither Adam nor Eve had any ability to sin OR transgress as they were INNOCENT and could do nothing against God.
Confused yet? Yeah... so it the prophet!
Bottom line: We don't know and no fun little funeral song that some "woman" wrote make "Mother in Heaven" real. Maybe only men are resurrected and the spirits of women (whatever that means) that came from men (whatever collective that entails) is magnetically gravitated to the "male" resurrected being so as to "complete" and "perfect" the lesser/weaker? Maybe a lot of men don't want to attain their split-buddy "weakness" doppelganger so they live as perfect MEN (now this one has a penis and are like we males here on earth, we can kind of be sure) but live as angels to Gods and are not Gods themselves as Gods are the rib-mix-reunion thing attained after resurrection. Right?
Yet, we live in this insane "All men (which means everybody even though it USED to mean those with a penis) are created equal (whatever that means!)" from the US constitution and we just decide that's a fact even though Jesus was a "man" (whatever that means) and we all admit that "He" is better than we are since he was 1/2 man and 1/2 Elohim and we are 100% man even though man is either the literal sons of Michael who is Elohim OR Elohim is the 100% son of Elohim which means we are directly 100% from Elohim which makes us 100% like Jesus but for some reason Jesus, we all agree, is better than we are ... so much for all men being equal?
Yeah, it's a big, fat mess and the church leaders refuse to clear any of it up because they are just as clueless as the rest of us. So, we say, "Well hey, you're worth hundreds of billions of dollars of our tithing money - pray about it and get an answer; we deserve at least that much, right?" and they say, "yeah, we try and the best we can do is tell you women are neat-o and there's probably a heavenly mother and if you wanna believe in Santa Clause we think that's keen-o and if you think, like Joe Biden, that the heart of America and all just morality lies in the hear of the transgender community, well, we sure won't disagree with you there either! Oh, and hey, let's give millions of dollars to the NAACP while we're at it!"
yeah, welcome to hell - don't expect the church to clear any of this up ... now shut up and give us 10% or you'll burn!!!
Why no middle initial?