ES...just read your post here, and it was eye-opening. I remember reading something about this in the past--this mistaken idea of men being the only creators and how it circulated in the 1800s. It gave a theological foundation for institutional misogyny. It also fascinates/irritates me that the current leadership is so non-progressive; they: 1) can't own the mistakes made; 2) have to defend the "prophetic "integrity" of their predecessors; 3) can't seem to make any changes themselves to really and progressively move forward.el-asherah wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:22 amYes the thought process in this thread is beyond weird, but it is about to get weirder.Emower wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:26 amThis thought process going on in this thread is all the proof needed that the church is not true. Seriously, how weird is this discussion? And the TBM trope that we shouldnt think about it much because there is not much revealed about it is bogus because BY and JS talked about it a lot. It is an important aspect of our early theology and informs a lot of our current theology. Hence, the RFM podcast.
I've mentioned this concept before in an earlier thread but it is worth repeating here to flesh out this thread.
So hold on to your seat belts as we descend further down the rabbit hole.
I learned this little tidbit of history while listening to John Larson's Mormon Expression podcast on the Adam God Theory.
Medical knowledge of human sexual reproduction was incomplete in the 1800s. At the time the cultural attitudes were that only men had the power of procreation. Without getting too explicit, men were thought to procreate because well... you can see it, and women were not thought to procreate because well.. you can't see it. Women were viewed as incubators of men's creations. The Mater (as in mother) was thought to come from the women, but the spirit, the pattern (Pater) was thought to come from the man.
So in Joseph Smiths and Brigham Youngs day, this basic misunderstanding of human reproduction got encapsulated into Mormon theology. Since, only men have the power of procreation, and being a God is all about creation, then only men can become Gods and create, and therefore God himself was once a man. Women since they do not have the power of creation are incubators for men's creations, and when a man becomes a God, he needs lots of Goddesses as incubators in order to do a lot of creating of spirit children.
For God the priesthood is his power of creation (not just spirit children, but also creating planets from chaotic matter, etc). Men can have the priesthood for a trial period on earth to see if they are worthy for when then become a God and start doing heavy duty creating. If they are not worthy they can not procreate after their earth life (the TK smoothies). Women can never have the priesthood because they will never have this power of creation. Their role on earth and in heaven is to be mothers and incubators for their husband God. In earlier temple ceremonies a women's husband was her God.
It is interesting to note that there are ZERO canonized revelations in the church that say women can not have the priesthood. But yet they can't due to this mistaken idea from the 1800s that got enshrined into the theology and the institutional inertia of the mindset of the brethren up to now.
Out of this mistaken idea we get - men can become Gods, Gods create through sexual reproduction, polygamy, celestial marriage, women as Goddesses are mothers and incubators to their husband God, men can have the priesthood, women can't, and gender is eternal as in the "Proclamation on the Family". Plus in order to control people - only the brethren (Joseph Smith) have the power to tell God which people can be married forever and become Gods and (later prophets) which families are permitted to be together in heaven.
Guess what folks. If women weren't around, there wouldn't BE NO MEN TO HOLD THE PRIESTHOOD!
I've had women bosses. I've worked for some CEOs who were female, and they were EXCELLENT. I have no problem working for and with someone who is smart, gifted, powerful and accomplished. Two were very gifted and inspired those that worked for them. WOW, they both were very feminine as well. Powerful and feminine, even elegant. What a rocking combination.
The Q15 freak out about women like this. I remember reading that Boyd Packer really had a problem with Elaine Jack: she was too snazy and independent for him. The guy was a caveman...