What's interesting is that there IS space in orthodox Christianity to see the divine feminine in the person of the Holy Spirit. BUT no space to talk about a Heavenly Mother.
That sounds interesting. Could you expound on it?
I was going to point out the Blair Hodges has also left MI and is now openly praising LBGTQ+ acceptance on Facebook. But . . . someone beat me to it.
Sounds like his desire to do the right thing was hampered by his employment at BYU.
Tim wrote:
Small "o" orthodox, not capital "O" Orthodox.
Oh. Which one? There are thousands. They can't all be "o"rthodox.
Sure they can be. It's a big tent. The consensus of the majority that self-consistently defines the consensus includes things like Trinitarianism, so it doesn't just include everything, but there are a lot of details that it doesn't sweat. Most mainstream Christian denominations recognise each other's baptisms, for instance.
Physics Guy wrote:
Sure they can be. It's a big tent. The consensus of the majority that self-consistently defines the consensus includes things like Trinitarianism, so it doesn't just include everything, but there are a lot of details that it doesn't sweat. Most mainstream Christian denominations recognise each other's baptisms, for instance.
The tent should be big enough to include all who worship Jesus Christ, including Mormons.
If the tent is defined by eternal salvation then that's up to God, anyway. But if you're just trying to define meaningful categories, then honestly the Mormon version of Jesus is hard to recognise. He looks like an impostor merely claiming the name. He shows up in Alma descending from the sky and committing cold-blooded genocide because the people in those cities, they were bad, oh yes, right down to the children. That's so violently out of character that no, I'm not sure I can buy that merely revering his traditional name is the same as worshiping the same person. To this cradle Anglican reading Alma really felt like reading a knock-off fan-fiction version of Hamlet in which Hamlet pulls out an Uzi in the last act and guns down his opponents. Simply not the same guy, no matter what the text says is his name.
Bought Yahoo wrote:
There are Heavenly Mothers. Probably innumerable, and therefore incapable of individuali worship.
I imagine the heavenly switchboard could likely direct my prayers and devotions to the appropriate Mother.
"Sorry but Heavenly Mother #54999501 isn't available right now to answer your prayer, but Heavenly Mother #94011943 has an opening at 10:30. Does that work for you?"
"I advise all to go on to perfection and search deeper and deeper into the mysteries of Godliness." -Joseph Smith
If the tent is defined by eternal salvation then that's up to God, anyway. But if you're just trying to define meaningful categories, then honestly the Mormon version of Jesus is hard to recognise. He looks like an impostor merely claiming the name. He shows up in Alma descending from the sky and committing cold-blooded genocide because the people in those cities, they were bad, oh yes, right down to the children. That's so violently out of character that no, I'm not sure I can buy that merely revering his traditional name is the same as worshiping the same person. To this cradle Anglican reading Alma really felt like reading a knock-off fan-fiction version of Hamlet in which Hamlet pulls out an Uzi in the last act and guns down his opponents. Simply not the same guy, no matter what the text says is his name.
A subtle issue in semantics, perhaps.
So I take it that Anglicans do not identify Jesus with Jehovah?
"He disturbs the laws of his country, he forces himself upon women, and he puts men to death without trial.” ~Otanes on the monarch, Herodotus Histories 3.80.
Yes, that's right. It's not up to "Tim" or to "Physics Guy." Like all believing Latter-day Saints, I'm a Christian.
Agreed.
"He disturbs the laws of his country, he forces himself upon women, and he puts men to death without trial.” ~Otanes on the monarch, Herodotus Histories 3.80.