Mary Called Magdalene


mary-magdaleneI haven’t been alive that long, but it seems to me that even since the time I was a kid there has been more and more talk about Mary Magdalene.  The Dan Brown books created a lot of buzz, and new texts and gospels keep appearing that give more and more hints as to the prominence of Mary Magdalene in the early Christian church.  She was called the Apostle to the Apostles in more than one of these texts.  Much has been written about whether she was the wife of Jesus.

Does it matter?  I guess that is up to all of us to decide.  Even the LDS church openly taught at one time that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus, they just happened to also teach that he had quite a few other wives as well…..

So here is what everyone agrees with in the KJV New Testament that has been written about her.

  • Jesus cast seven demons out of her (Luke 8:2; Mark 16:9).
  • She was one of many who provided for Jesus out of her own means (Luke 8:1-3).
  • She witnessed the crucifixion of Christ (Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; John 19:25).
  • She was present at his burial (Matt 27:61; Mark 15:47).
  • She arrived at Jesus’ tomb on the Sunday following his crucifixion to find his body missing (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-7; John 20:1).
  • She saw the risen Lord, spoke with him, and later reported the encounter to the apostles (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:11-1

We can all agree on those things.  This list alone suggests she had some very unique experiences.  From these references we learn Mary witnessed much of the Lord’s ministry, his crucifixion, his burial, and was the first witness (besides heavenly beings) of his resurrection.  There are many other references to “Mary” in the New Testament.  It just doesn’t always specify which Mary is being mentioned because there appeared to be a lot of different “Marys”.

I have already mentioned the importance of names and titles. The name Mary is a title.  The sister of Moses and Aaron was named “Miriam,” which is the same word.  Naomi at one point said to call her “Mara,” also the same word. The name of Jesus’ mother was apparently Mary, and there were multiple other Marys mentioned.  The name itself means BITTER.  It gets very interesting to think of the symbolism in the experiences of John and Ezekiel.

Ezek 3:3-4,14

3 And he said unto me, Son of man, cause thy belly to eat, and fill thy bowels with this roll that I give thee. Then did I eat it; and it was in my mouth as honey for sweetness.
4 And he said unto me, Son of man, go, get thee unto the house of Israel, and speak with my words unto them…..
14 So the spirit lifted me up, and took me away, and I went in bitterness, in the heat of my spirit; but the hand of the Lord was strong upon me.

And…Rev 10:10

10 And I took the little book out of the angel’s hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.

Revelation from God is always sweet. Feasting upon the Word is delicious. The fruits of the Spirit always will accompany revelation. To those who receive some of the higher things a type of bitterness will follow. It is interesting how it mentions the bowels and belly in the verses above. Did you know there are more nerve endings in your belly (bowels) than in your brain?  There is a whole lot more going on with our bowels than many people realize. In the scriptures we read things about how Jesus’ bowels were filled with compassion. Interesting stuff.

Now imagine being filled with understanding about the suffering and sin going on in the world, and being filled with a Perfect Mother’s love for each of those who are under the bondage of sin.  Wouldn’t this cause bitterness in your soul?   Who wouldn’t wear out their days in trying to assist their children who were suffering and assisting them to find joy in redemption if they had the power in them to do so?

The title Mary as far as I have learned is given to a female who has received Charity and reached a fullness of the Holy Spirit.  They have been filled with the love and understanding of their Heavenly Mother.  Men eventually need to receive all of the same gifts of wisdom and compassion that women do.  Christ had the perfect balance of both male and female attributes. Here are some interesting words from a gnostic text.

Gospel of Thomas section 114

Simon Peter said to them, “Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of Life.” Jesus said, “I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.”

At first glance this might appear to be sexist…, not if we understand the truth of God’s plan.  Jesus could have very well been talking to men and saying that they would need to be made female.  Each of us must be filled with all of the love, spirit, attributes, and understanding of our Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother.  Redemption cannot come without knowing them both.

It is my belief that evil and conspiring men intentionally made changes to the Bible to masculinize the gospel and pervert the meaning of scripture.  Somehow the idea that Mary Magdalene was a harlot became a widely held belief.  The idea seemed to originate from the following scripture.

Luke 7:37-38

A woman in the city, who was a sinner, having learned that he was eating in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster jar of ointment. She stood behind him at his feet, weeping, and began to bathe his feet with her tears and to dry them with her hair. Then she continued kissing his feet and anointing them with the ointment.”

In the following verses a man named Simon said in his heart that if Jesus knew what manner of woman this was, He would not let her do this.  Simon gets a good rebuke afterwards.  Ok so a couple of times in Luke 7 this woman is called a sinner, and then people started calling Mary Magdalene a harlot….WHAT?

Couldn’t they have come up with any other sin or did it have to be a prostitute?  They could have just as easily said she was a thief, or a bigot, or lazy, but they had to go ahead and throw out something that would totally defame her character, and turn people from ever thinking much of her. Why? Compare an account from Mark (very similar to the account in Matthew)…

Mark 14:3-9

3 And being in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat, there came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very precious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head.4 And there were some that had indignation within themselves, and said, Why was this waste of the ointment made? 5 For it might have been sold for more than three hundred pence, and have been given to the poor. And they murmured against her.6 And Jesus said, Let her alone; why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work on me.7 For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.8 She hath done what she could: she is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying.9 Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.

Completely different version here. No mention of a sinner although some judgments are cast as to the use of the ointment. What I wanted to focus on was the combined accounts and some interesting things found in them. This woman ANOINTED Jesus and she did what she could do.  It had something to do with Christ’s body and His “burying.” There is also emphasis on the HAIR and FEET. Admittedly in these accounts there is no mention that this is Mary Magdalene. That can only be obtained by the Spirit.

So let’s see what other scriptures we can find that talk about hair and feet.

1Cor 11:1-15

1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a GLORY to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Again in these verses (which in all likelihood have been corrupted), we find words that could appear to be sexist.  When understanding is given, perhaps we can find Paul is actually teaching some beautiful truths about the relationship of women and men. Keep in mind he brings up ORDINANCES, and then goes on to talk about women being veiled (heads being covered), and their hair be glory. Also he mentions that women are the glory of men. What does it all mean? Could he not be referencing the very ordinance that was mentioned above in Luke?  The woman being willing to submit to the man and share her glory with him? Through a sacred anointing she symbolically conveys that she is willing to impart of her light and spirit to her husband, forming a perfect seal and bond, making them one spirit and flesh. No I am not saying they become a conglomerate being. I am suggesting the perfect unification of their elements and the perfect marriage.

The symbolism of the veil is beautiful. Even though I believe there are some serious errors in the LDS endowment, we can draw symbolism from part of the ritual. The man must be made worthy by the Lord to behold the glory of the woman (symbolized by her hair). After the man is brought through the veil by the Lord, he can also part the veil of his wife’s glory and become one with her. The veil covering the woman’s glory is removed at the same time that the veil to the Holy of Holies is removed. The man is not worthy of the woman until the Lord has made him so!

Let’s look at some other similar writings…

Ephesians 5:22-33

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

Again it becomes apparent that Paul is talking about ordinances here that have to do with a wife and husband becoming one. First of all I want to point out that a woman is to submit to her husband “as unto the Lord.” Why does anyone submit to the Lord? Well we wouldn’t if he wasn’t a being worthy of submitting to. My understanding is that Paul is teaching here that when a woman’s husband is made worthy by God, she is to be willing to submit to a lesser being and share her glory with him that they might become one. Of course they are both strengthened by the other, and receiving all of the power of a righteous father and mother exalts them both, but it is my feeling that each wife actually has more glory than her husband, and the husband has to be made worthy to partake of it.

I know that all of these scriptural references might seem to only vaguely resemble the others, and that it may seem like a stretch to accept what I am saying about the symbolism, but let’s look a little further. Notice above Paul mentions Christ cleansing the church with “the washing of water.” Is this referencing baptism or something else…?

John 13:4-5

4 He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself.
5 After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded.

mary-anointing-jesusOk how beautiful is this?!  Remember I talked about what the real garments are? If Jesus took his garments off it must be important! He is willing to impart of his glory to those present! He then begins to wash THEIR FEET with water. The feet have a lot of symbolism. They represent our connection to the earth for one. If they are cleansed by the Savior we are cleansed from the blood and sins of the earth. The feet are also symbolic of our travels. Through this imagery Christ is teaching that his glory will be with the disciples wherever their feet will take them.  Again I would like to suggest that this is an “anointing” ordinance and is a preparation for something to come. (Day of Pentecost)

After the Lord finishes he tells the disciples to go and do likewise.  Think of the Sacrament and how in both the Bible and Book of Mormon the Savior imparts first to the disciples and then they go impart to others, same concept here.

Alright so what is all of this leading up to?  Well, I am suggesting that Jesus and Mary had a perfect union.  She was his wife and they were sealed spirit to spirit in a perfect marriage.  She was completely willing to impart of her soul and light, as he was completely willing to impart of his with her.

Ok this shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise. Most people in the LDS culture entertain the idea at one time or another that Jesus was / is married. It fits into the title of Rabbi, into the first witness of his resurrection being Mary Magdalene, and into the framework of a husband and wife needing one another to become heirs of God’s kingdom. Let me go on to something that has been seared deeply into my soul.

To say that Mary was willing to impart of her spirit meant A LOT!

Luke 22:39-46

39 And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him. 40 And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation.41 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast, and kneeled down, and prayed,42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.43 And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.45 And when he rose up from prayer, and was come to his disciples, he found them sleeping for sorrow,46 And said unto them, Why sleep ye? rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation.

Well I can’t give any scriptural evidences. All I can do is share my testimony that I know that the angel who strengthened Jesus after he asked if the BITTER CUP might be removed was none other than Mary Magdalene. I know it. Many have suggested possibilities of the angel being Michael or other men. Bruce R McConkie I think suggested this saying that Michael was next in the line of authority. I can tell you in all humility that while the men slept it was a woman, who went to the Lord as an angel from heaven to strengthen him in the tortures endured. She gave of her light and spirit for him, and for all of us.

mary-at-the-tombIf there is ever another person that deserves praise beside Jesus, it is not another man, it is his wife. If we can but think that Jesus needs a wife to be a God, then do we not also need his wife? Makes sense to me. Remember the disciples were asleep at this time. We have no account of witnesses of what happened, so Jesus must have thought it important to share that an angel came to strengthen him. Though much of what is precious has been taken from the Bible, the Lord planned for certain things to remain that people could see and learn by the Spirit when the time was right.

So my intent is not to meddle with anyone’s beliefs here, it is to share my own testimony. Take and consider if you will. Some other fun facts that you might find interesting I will quickly relate.  For centuries a tradition has been handed down that Mary Magdalene was a “hairdresser.” I don’t think most people have thought more than this except that it was her occupation. Could it have been more? Could Simon have thought she was a sinner because she openly professed to priesthood power and helped women to prepare their hair for a sacred ordinance? There is so much more to women than we currently have been given in scripture. The Bible has been corrupted, and the Book of Mormon lists the names of 3 or 4 women that I can think of. We have Sariah the wife of Lehi, Abish, Isabel, and then the name Mary that was given to Nephi by revelation. That’s it.

Every man who wrote on the plates neglected to mention the name of his wife.  Was this just not important enough or were they commanded to not include many things about women? Do we as a people have to be made worthy by the Lord to learn the higher truths of Heavenly Mother and women? Let’s look at just a few quotes from some ancient texts that have been found concerning Mary called Magdalene.

“This word she spoke as a woman who knew the All” – Dialogue of the Savior section 139

Mary is spoken of in The Pistis Sophia as one “whose heart is more directed to the Kingdom of Heaven than all [her] brothers” (Chapter 17, trans. Carl Schmidt and Violet MacDermott). Jesus said that she was “blessed beyond all women upon the earth, because [she shall be] the pleroma of all Pleromas and the completion of all completions” (section 19). She is the blessed one who will “inherit the whole Kingdom of the Light” (section 61).

“There were three who always walked with the Lord: Mary his mother and her sister and Magdalene, the one who was called his companion” (section 59). – Gospel of Phillip

Now back to titles.

Luke 8:2

2 And certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils.

Magdalene is interpreted as the fortress, high tower, or castle. This is a title. With this in mind we can wonder if prophecies of her in scripture exist. Look at one translation of a verse in Micah…

Micah 4:8

And you, O Magdalah of the flock, hill of daughter Zion, to you it shall come, the former dominion shall come, the sovereignty of daughter Jerusalem.

Thank you to all those who have read this long post.  I have been edified and inspired by some of the recent posts by others and appreciated the opportunity to share some of the beliefs I cherish. God bless. – Minority of One

Mary, we did not know you.
Kept hidden for centuries you were despised,
A Queen not seen, under harlot’s disguise.
Mary, we did not know you.
No Wife has He, we were told.
No Priestess, no Bride, no Queen, He was alone.
They dressed you in rags, royal purple not shown.
Mary, we did not know you.
My heart weeps for what was lost.
How we treated you, Divine Daughter on High.
I search Heaven and Earth and ask myself, why.
Mary, we did not know you.
May we now bring wrong to right.
We will sing of Your Queenship for all to hear.
We will ring your truth, north, south, far and near.
Mary, now all may know you.

-poem by Priestess Maya

 

69 Responses

  1. “All I can do is share my testimony that I know that the angel who strengthened Jesus after he asked if the BITTER CUP might be removed was none other than Mary Magdalene. I know it”

    Well, your blog is an interesting bit of entertaining speculation. How the mortal Mary Magdalene can also serve as an angel sent from God, I don’t comprehend. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, even though it lacks a shred of scriptural support. Best regards.

    Like

  2. I don’t know for sure about what you have written, but I was just thinking today how much Satan must hate women. He has used so many opportunities to attack women, and to kick them to the ground–literally and figuratively. They are abused and crushed and relegated to lower class citizens. To not vote, to not be heard, to not be seen, or not regarded. Or attacked by vulgar words and “whore-ized” or “b-word-ized”. So much attack against women.

    Why would Satan hate women so much and get evil men to do his bidding in his war against them.

    Like

  3. Just from a cultural stand point back then I don’t think Mary Magdalene would have been able to have such access to Jesus had she not had been his wife. It would not have been proper for her to just follow Him. She would have been given in marriage to someone and how would she be free to follow Him? She was not His sister. I believe a lot of jealousy followed her and that kind of pressure would have gotten her cast out had she not had the privilege of wife not given her the right to be by his side so often.

    Like

  4. All I can say is wow, Wow and WOW! This was beautifully written and made very easy to understand. Thank you for the time taken to share your thoughts and testimony. Now I will do my part by asking for light. I have questioned the woman’s veil for a number of years.

    A virgin becomes a mother…to God all things are possible.

    Like

  5. MinofOne,

    My high regard for the energy and time you spent on this piece. The world is in strong delusion and cling to their beliefs like a shawl in winter. Thigs are opening up these days. energy is changing, our bodies are changing and our higher selves are emerging. People want to always remain the same, but the truth is, we are changing in preparation.

    That means more writings are coming forth. Your delving into the concept of Mary Magdalene is beautiful. The concept of Satan teaching the domination of women and men’s authority over them is exemplified in the writings of the Nemenhah, it clearly shows this position. It also shows that the priesthood is inherent within the woman as given them from Heavenly Mother. There is no conferring needed in this life, only ordination. Men are to brake the shackles of the natural man and feel the sacrifice of the Savior such as women do in childbirth, giving up all for the bringing of life, just as the Savior.

    Now those of you viewing this may say, “Where in the scriptures is this doctrine?” I say unto you, there is more. It is ready for viewing if we are ready.

    My thoughts on the angel that visited the Savior during his suffering and interlude, spoken in the writings of Nemenhah was the Holy Ghost. Now this may or may not be true as you see it. There could have been more of those attending, such as Mary and not disclosed in scripture. But the Holy Ghost was the only one with power to imprint all of mankind’s sins, despair, follies, sorrows, pain, jealousies. judgements, etc., that mankind has or will go through. All of the experiences of the Father must be imprinted on His being for Him to receive of the Father’s fullness. This was done in waves of suffering in which His pure body could not withstand. The physical and spiritual anomaly was foreign to this imprint of the experiences of mankind. Therefore Christs had to release through sweat and great drops of blood through His pores.

    I feel this. I do not need mankind to prove anything written in conventional scripture, as they see it, to discount the feelings I have in this matter. When more is given, the enlargement of the soul is begins. The same was in the time of Joseph Smith. New things that men could not abide if not spelled out in the Bible. Where would we be if we all discounted the restoration writings because they didn’t line up with scripture available then?

    There is so much to learn. The Spirit has taught me things I never would have thought concerning the changes going on these days. Give me 10 years ago and I would have discounted all these things coming forth today.

    God bless all those open to the Spirit and do not rely on intellectual knowledge only for truth; For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

    Thank you for this post and all other posts. I am edified in the pursuit of Christ and His gospel of repentance. Like DS said, repentance is shedding ignorance, not just changing our ways. Bless you.

    Like

  6. This is quite incredible. May I add a few things that you may not be aware of? . In the Roman Empire the name was used as a feminine form of the Roman name Marius (see Maria (gens)). It became popular with the spread of Christianity as a Latinized form of the Hebrew name of Jesus’ mother Mary (Miriam in Hebrew or Maryam in Aramaic) but it may originally be an Egyptian name, probably derived from mry “beloved” or mr “love” (“eminent lady” or “beloved lady”). Many believe Mary is also a title for “High Priestess”. In Latin the name Maria (a form of Mary) means “Star of the Sea”. This is significant when you understand that all things are written in the stars and how important the cosmos are to our God. The Greek word for the consecrated priestess of the temples was hierodule–a sacred woman. But because of her activities as a conduit for the gifts and blessings of the Goddess, this word was later translated and became identified with the pejorative term “prostitute,” making no distinction between the calling of the temple priestess and that of a profane woman of the street. This has become the prevailing view of the woman with the alabaster jar–that she was “a sinner of the town,” because her anointing of Jesus was perceived to be the “goddess” activity of a pagan priestess, an anathema to the Jewish community. There is evidence that Mary Magdalene raised doves for temple sacrifices and they have recently discovered in the village that she is purported coming from (Magdala) that she also raised bees. A recent archaeological dig has found a mosaic floor that was part of an early Christian church which has Jesus with a sun above his head and Mary Magdalene which the crescent moon above hers.

    Like

    • Nice info. Very informative and adds greatly to the discussion. Thank you. It seems that most pagan rituals, the Greek and Roman mythology and other things came from truth originally, especially in the strange things happened in the days of Noah, genetic manipulation, weather changing, etc. All is corrupted from the original action that took place; such is Satan’s methodology.

      Like

  7. When we named our children, I tried to tune into the Spirit to know what to name them. I always felt the meanings of their names were important. I was disappointed to discover that Mary meant bitter but I felt that was meant to be my daughter’s name.

    Later I learned that some thought Mary could also mean “loved one.” For me, that is the name that I accept. It fits.

    We can believe what we want to believe. We can believe Mary’s name means “bitter” or “loved one.” We can believe Mary was a prostitute or a priestess. Our beliefs won’t change reality, but they will show us who we are.

    It probably won’t hurt anyone in the long run to believe Mary was a prostitute. But what will make a difference is what we believe of those close to us. Do you believe your wife is an angel or a fool? Some husbands seem to treat their wives like fools. That is going to make a difference.

    Like

  8. There are some good documentaries that address Mary Magdalene and Jesus … though they take some liberties, it has good information. http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/mysteries-mary-magdalene/ For your information, the greek translation of do not touch me is “do not hold onto me” Mary was embracing him after the resurrection. And as I have said an another thread, before Joseph Smith died, he formed the Anointed Quorum, where the women were anointed as Queens and Priestesses UNTO GOD, not unto their husband. Brigham Young changed that wording. The balance of male and female, the coming together and the union as being one will be restored soon. There is also a very good series on cable right now entitled “Biblical Conspiracies” a four part — one of the part s is called The Bride of God and addresses what is being discussed here and though they are in error re: Mary being a Phoenician, they make a connection to the story of Joseph and Aseneth being a type and shadow for Jesus and Mary … Mary is the Holy Grail for she held the bloodline of Jesus … Thank you all for your comments … the amount of knowledge and revelation coming forth from heaven is remarkable and exciting. May we all be humble in all that we do so that we carry the spirit with us at all times. Merry Christmas to you. Have you noticed that this phrase “Merry Chistmas” honors the Godhead? Merry (being Mother in Heaven” – Christ being of course Jesus and the Mass – Sacrament – communion with God the Father. So may you all have a relationship with all three!

    Like

  9. Joseph

    Beautiful I had not heard a lot of that and that brings a great deal more to look into. That really hit me hard about the sun and the moon because of some things I have been contemplating thank you. I know some scholars have suggested that the “beloved” disciple was Mary Magdalene and that she may have even authored the gospel of John. Thanks for your awesome input. It is always wonderful to see others finding and embracing similar truths.

    Sfort,

    I have now met a couple different people who have told me they had dreams or eye of faith experiences concerning the atonement and how they saw many people coming to strengthen the Savior one after the other until many were present. I believe we can continue to serve as angels who strengthen Him in the infinite and eternal (interesting words) atonement if we will receive the Spirit of Christ and then impart to others until all become one in the body of Christ. That being said I now believe the Holy Ghost acts as a medium for all of that to happen so I am not sure that both positions can’t be reconciled.

    Thank you all for your comments and input. God bless and Merry Christmas!

    Like

  10. Hey Minority … thank you for our insightful posts … It is my belief, that John the Beloved is actually the son of Jesus and Mary .,.. I know … that’s a paradigm shift isn’t it? As Mary has been veiled in the scriptures as Jesus’ counterpart, so is John the Beloved status as son is also veiled. He is referred to as one of the Sons of Thunder. Well, in other cultures Thunder and Lightning are titles for God. When you come to understand the succession of the Gods, especially with the works of Hugh Nibley in Egypt, then it makes sense to me about John being a son because bloodline is huge. When one undertakes a serious study of the OT and the NT there is so much that opens up to our understanding. The OT has all the patterns of God … and the NT is all about Jesus’ ministry … something we don’t have in either the BOM or D&C. Though I love the Pearl of Great Price I believe we as LDS are totally illiterate of our heritage, which is the bloodline of Israel. Some believe that Aramaic is a language older than Hebrew, but it is my belief that Hebrew is a restored language which outdates most languages for it is a mystery language. Every alphabet letter in Hebrew tells the life of the Savior. It’s a mystical language, like the gnosis. But then of course I could be completely “off” about everything. Family matters and like the Godhead being a family endeavor to bring us back into heaven, it is a family endeavor (Jesus, Mary and John) to restore all things. Joseph Smith talks about John being the Elias before the Second Coming and says John restores all things, gathers all Israel, and that John’s mission is an ordinance. Beautiful things are being revealed and restored.

    Like

  11. And Minority, you may want to look into Val Brinkerhoff’s books … all about symbolism, sacred geometry, numbers, astronomy and how it relates to Jesus’ life. His books are rather deep, and sometimes hard to plow through because they are like an encyclopedia … like Hugh Nibley and Margaret Barker’s works but they are incredible and worth the time and effort and well worth the investment. I have learned such incredible things from the spirit through reading his works.

    Like

    • Man you and I are on the same page big time. I will have to check out val brinkerhoffs stuff. I read a quote by him (I think it was him or her) about the blood moons and it hit me hard.
      So have you read the acts of the apostles (gnostic text) where it talks about lethargoel? John the revelator is depicted nearly as a child or a young man compared to the rest of the apostles. In the Book of Mormon it is interesting nephi only says the names of Jesus, John the Baptist, john the revelator and Mary from his vision.
      I really believe john the revelator and John the Baptist have huge roles with what is coming. Awesome I love it.
      So many relatives. Cleopus and his wife according to some traditions were related to Mary and joseph as well.
      Yeah boenerges is really cool with the thunder being symbolic. Reminiscent of mount Sinai etc. Or angels coming to speak with the voice of “thunder”. I have taken to the thought that thunder is more of the female side of things but anyway thanks what a relief that others are seeing things the same way.

      Like

      • Minority and others who may be interested – the Bible Conspiracies series I mentioned is no longer showing on the Science Channel, but I found a link that you can buy the episodes for $1.99 or $2.99 each … The Bride of God deals with Mary Magdalene … the Crucifixion is very good also and the Secrets of the Sculpture by Michelangelo is amazing. You can go to http://www.vudu.com/movies/#!episodes/632384/632376/Biblical-Conspiracies-Secrets-in-the-Sculpture. Just keep in mind that some of the things the producer offers is not scripturally based … but he offers so much to ponder upon.

        May you all have a blessed and Merry Christmas … centered in the Messiah who we are all anxious to receive.

        Like

      • Minority
        Do you not know who Val Brinkerhoff is? He is a he and not a she. And if you studied enough you would know that the ANGEL FROM HEAVEN WAS ALSO A HE.

        Like

  12. _How_ did you obtain a testimony that “ I know that the angel who strengthened Jesus after he asked if the BITTER CUP might be removed was none other than Mary Magdalene. “? Was it a feeling? Was it a voice in your head? Was it an auditory voice? I am not casting completel rejection of your statement in my head, though I do ask for more details. Also, _how_ can it be that “a woman,..went to the Lord as an angel from heaven.” What do you mean by angel? Did you mean as a heavenly messenger? If so, are mortals allowed to transform into a heavenly messengers, by God, in order to carry forth an specific task? Please elaborate.

    Like

  13. “Abraham was on the mount with the knife in his hand at the sacrifice of Isaac, and God the Father was present at the sacrifice of His Son. Indeed, Christ’s sufferings required the Father to be present in order to reconcile man to the Father. It was the presence of the Father that made the suffering possible. Therefore, we know the identity of the unnamed angel in Luke. (Luke 22: 43.) Christ could not have suffered the guilt of all mankind in the presence of a just and holy God, unless during this moment of torment His suffering was before that very Being.”

    Source: http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2012/05/mosiah-3-7.html

    Like

    • … And yet… “And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.”

      Does that fit?

      Like

      • And does “from heaven” fit Mary Magdalene?

        Like

        • And it reads the same in the JST.

          Like

        • The concordance is interesing.

          “From heaven” in the Greek text we have does mean “from the sky.”

          And “strengthening” seems to hold too – “giving strength.”

          So can everyone be wrong?

          Like

        • And “angel” seems to be explicit as well – one of the hosts of heaven.

          Like

        • Could it have been the Father? There is precedence, of a sort, for that kind of thing.

          I believe Brigham Young taught that one of the angels who rolled away the stone of the tomb was the Father – though not explicitly, but implicitly. I’m not saying Brigham’s an authority on these things, though.

          And there’s this.

          3 Nephi 11:8
          8 And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them.

          But if it was the Father, whose presence was supposed to be causing even greater agony to Christ, then that seems to work against the thesis that the angel was strengthening Christ.

          And if it was Mary Magdalene, she’d have to have been pulling a Mary Poppins.

          Also, we don’t know if Luke was an eyewitness to these events. He could have been repeating someone else – Christ, the other apostles who were present, or perhaps recounting data he’d acquired through visionary means.

          Who knows?

          Like

        • Of course if you are asking me then I think an angel from heaven is quite fitting :).
          I do think your question has merit and is appropriate to think.
          Not that I would compare the strength of Mary or Jesus to know who could strengthen who since they are both each other’s strength, but in response to your question a triple a battery could strengthen the battery in my f250 if you think about it… One does not have to have more power than another to strengthen that individual. I didn’t know if that was what you might be suggesting.

          Like

  14. Ultimately the way I know it is the same way I know anything and that is by the burning of the Holy Ghost. I have had many confirmations of it. The first night I learned it was with the burning of the Holy Ghost being filled with fire and God spoke it to me. The fire of the Holy Ghost lasted for perhaps 20 minutes or so it was very plain and very powerful.
    We would have to ask Denver the same question and also how the Father could be “an angel”. I also know the Father was present. Of course there were many many people involved. In the scriptures in multiple cases we have a bit of confusion as far as angelic ministry. The three men who appeared to Abraham for example. Men? Angels? Translated beings? Also yes men and women can be transfigured and conveyed by the spirit and appear as angels. If you look into when Peter (pretty sure it was peter) was in prison someone saw him outside of a gate and they knew he was in prison so someone suggested that it was “his angel”.
    Plus remember that nephi was caught up to an exceedingly high mountain. It was very clear in the Book of Mormon that his body was conveyed and not only his spirit. Ascension will become quite common as people’s bodies are changed and they travel back and forth from higher realms in the coming days. The records of Enoch go into this a little bit they are a good read.
    Of course no one should take anyone else’s word for anything we all need to get our own testimony on every point or we are trusting in the flesh if we just simply believe something without a witness of our own.
    During a vision my wife had this same thing was told to her and she learned that “Mary Magdalene helped with the atonement. Not physically but spiritually she did all she could.”, among other things she was told.
    Remember a man is not complete without a woman. Jesus Christ would not be complete without a wife. He could not be exalted anymore than any other man could be without a wife. It simply wouldn’t be possible. If a man is to become “one flesh” and coequal with his wife then that of necessity means The Lord = Jesus and His wife. God = an exalted male and female.
    A lot of people might think it takes away from Jesus. How do you think Jesus looks at His wife? Does he look at her as an equal? I suggest that however we think Jesus looks at his wife would suggest to us how we ought to look at her as well.
    To some the idea of a man named Jesus being the literal son of a God incarnate sounds like Hercules and seems like a fairy tale. Many things can seem weird and uncomfortable but the instant the Holy Ghost bears witness of it to us we know it is right and it all makes perfect sense because it is woven into our spirit. I truly believe that nothing can be learned accept by revelation from the Holy Ghost. If the Holy Ghost reveals something to someone’s spirit there is no question or doubt because that truth becomes part of them.
    It is like if I asked a lot of people on here (I hope) how they know there is a God. To me if I deny one experience from the Holy Ghost I would have to necessarily deny the rest. Fortunately I am quite sure that will never happen.

    Like

    • Of course another very likely scenario like many things in the New Testament it very well could have been changed or mistranslated.

      Like

    • Should have been “except”.

      Like

      • I haven’t read any books by Denver so of course I don’t know when what I say might be conflicting with his teachings and I never want to cause discord.
        One thing I know beyond any doubt is that the two angels who were at the tomb were the “two witnesses” in revelations 11. The same who “stand by The Lord of all the earth” spoken of in Zechariah. This is part of the reason they were called the “2 witnesses” is because they witnessed the ordinance of the resurrection performed by the Father. All the apostles were special witnesses because they saw the risen Lord but the two angels actually witnessed the resurrection happen and they were still at the tomb when Mary Magdalene came to be the first living person to witness the Savior after the resurrection.
        These two witnesses were also the same two angels who stood by the apostles when Christ ascended and they said that He would return in like manner. Study out the 2 witnesses. These people with an important mission are also the two who Jesus said would be at his right and left hand appointed by the Father. (Story of James and John asking if they could sit at his right and left).
        Neither of those two angels was the Father. But again I suggest no one take my word for it or Denver’s or anyone’s. Look to God and get an answer from Him.

        Like

  15. I have had many personal experiences lately which lead me to believe that this article is true and inspired by God. “With God all things are possible.” Our ways are not His ways. I believe that things like this are impossible to be understood only by intellect. I have had many impressions about Christ’s wife being with Him during the atonement and feeling the sacredness of them as ONE. In fact, last night my husband and I were just talking about the concept of God making a counterpart for each soul and how the counterpart is a literal part of the soul (which is what I believe soul mates are). It is common sense to me that if Christ did in fact have an eternal companion, it would be impossible for Him to be one with her in ALL ways without her knowing what He went through. I would think that His counterpart would be needed to be there emotionally, spiritually and physically to at least some degree. The spirit had confirmed this to me a while ago.
    This just came to me just now.. What if He asked God to remove this BITTER CUP from Him because.. He, being the perfect example of love, would not want her to suffer as well… Just a thought.
    Thank you Nate for the beauty and bravery you share with the world.

    Like

    • Also… As I’ve been pondering just now the thought just occurred: most people (including myself) have assumed that when Jesus asked that this cup be passed from Him, “Nevertheless Thy will not Mine be done..” We have assumed that either the pain was just too intense He didn’t want to continue or that the last bit of “weakness” in Him would be taken or strengthened. However, He is PERFECT, the only sinless innocent human being. Asking His wife not suffer with Him is the most compassionate romantic thing I can think of and is the only explanation that fits the mold of a perfect God. I have a testimony that He is our perfect Savior who never wavered. “For he who wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.” (James 1:6)

      Like

      • These are beautiful thoughts thank you. This fits into my understanding perfectly of what it means to be “sealed”.
        It truly wouldn’t have mattered when Jesus was sealed to his wife because whenever it happened they would know each other’s experiences perfectly.

        This reminds me of someone’s experience I read about in the spirit world where he saw that two spirits do something that he called “passing the cup of sorrows”. The two spirits could meld and experience everything that the other did in life. This gave them perfect understanding and perfect love for each other. I believe each couple will be unified in such a way when they are truly “sealed”.
        This is why the bible talks about the possibility of a man being sanctified by his wife or the wife being sanctified by the husband.
        Like joseph said many things will soon be restored and the world will never be the same.

        Like

  16. […] Mary Called Magdalene […]

    Like

  17. Excellent post with much to ponder. Thanks for writing it.

    Mary as a title, with the meaning of “bitter” means, to me, that it is bitter being a woman in mortality because women have been bartered, bought, sold, enslaved, beaten, denied all rights, partial rights, deemed less than men, deemed owned by father then husband, given no education, no authority, no power, no autonomy, no dignity, treated as objects for the pleasure of men, deemed as objects for the enticement of men, been raped, murdered, cast aside with child or children, left destitute, deemed weak, lowly, and of little intelligence, deemed prone to hysterics and driven by emotion, incapable of sound reasonings, worthy only to serve men, deliver sons, raise sons, and, of course, change foul diapers! So the title of “bitter” speaks to woman’s lot here in this estate.

    In the past 100 years, and especially the past 50, women have gained much greater appreciation and standing in the world (the western world mainly) as greater light and knowledge has dawned toward the millenial day. Even the knowledge that The name Mary also means loved one, or beloved, has come to light. The bitter is giving way to being redeemed as a gender–not to be better than men, but neither to be below them any more.

    Interesting that Jesus called it the “bitter” or “Mary” cup. Hmmm….

    As to the angel who came to strengthen the Savior during the atonement….God, the Father is higher than all angels, so I do not believe He sent Himself as an angel. I do agree with Tim, though, that Christ’s experience had to be witnessed before the Father. Likewise, the Holy Ghost is God and higher than all angels, so He could not be the angel either, though he also needed to be present as a witness under the two witnesses doctrine. I believe Mary Magdalene could have been with Jesus in the garden and served angelicly to Him, though I’m not sure she was THE angel Heavenly Father sent. Sooo….

    I’ve wondered, pondered, over the decades if Michael, who helped CHRIST create the earth and became Adam, and who–together with Eve brought the fall of this earth and all humankind–came to stand with a “fallen” Savior who needed bearing up. Perhaps it was Eve who convinced Adam to partake of the “delicious” fruit that brought in reality brought “bitterness” to us all–perhaps it was she who came to help Him drink the “bitter” cup her and Adam first brought to the world.

    Or perhaps it was John the Baptist, Jesus’ cousin who prepared the way for Christ to come and now came to help see Him through the darkest hour of all time.

    I enjoy pondering on all holy things. Thanks to all of you for enriching such ponderings. I wish each a happy, safe, and wonderful new year of growth in discipleship, understanding, and greater Light. As we seek that Light, more light and knowledge will come forth.

    Like

  18. MofOne…as I read your post and came to the part where you shared your belief as to the identity of the angel, I was overwhelmed with another possibility even before finishing your statement that it was the Magdelene. Who in the eternities would have such empathy and desire to comfort the tormented Christ? Who would want to embrace Him and “share His agony” as if it were hers? Who would desire more than anything to “remove the bitter cup” if she could from one of her own? The person that came to my heart and soul was not a mortal being but a true eternal glorified being who had true intent and deep concern and eternal love for her…Son. I think another possibility for the angel’s identity could be none other than Heavenly Mother! Thank you for this post and for all you are sharing…keep it up.

    Like

    • Yes I have no doubt as to Her involvement. Another thought, how did Jesus come to be our Eternal Father? I think these are good questions to ponder on.

      Like

      • I Love this post!!! Thank you, I am a bit late but getting back into life here.

        Like

  19. This is an example of a posting where people put what ever is conjured up in their mind on the internet and act as if it is truth or gospel. From these postings of Minority , I see all these sources of all these philosophies of all these men, all half baked and adding to the confusion of the earth. People, please do not listen to what is pleasing to the ear but prove all things. There are those who claim to be prophets but are as the blind leading the blind and they shall both fall into the ditch. Jesus is not our Eternal Father as Minority claims. Jesus is The Son and was sent as a gift unto the world, A Savior and a Light to show us the way to live and worship The Father through righteous behaviors and devotion. Light makes things discernible. Darkness adds confusion and consternation to our lives.

    Like

    • Jolene,

      Better pray that the darkness will be taken then so we can see clearly. I don’t think minority of one has ever clamined to be a prophet. I don’t believe he has ever been half baked either. I agree wth you though that we need to not listen to things that are just pleasing to the ear but is that what you do? We need to have all things proven like you say but can I ask, have you had the confirmation of the Holy Ghost that what minority of one has written is wrong? Have you let it be proven by God through the confirmation of the Holy Ghost ? Do you know that Minority of One claims to be prophet but is just another person that is blind leading the blind? Do you know that Jesus isn’t the eternal Father? I would like to know if you have received and proven any of these claims or accusations you make by the power of the Holy Ghost or they are just coming from the lips of another man or woman who draws near to god with lips and not with their heart. Are these things proven by you and your own intellect or from God? I am sincere and will be open if you can tell me you know these things and have proved them through God. If you can tell me you know by the power and confirmation of the Holy Ghost then I will pray and prove them myself once again if I need with the eternal father of light and love. God bless on your journey for REAL light and truth. I pray you will come out of darkness if you are in it on this matter and see the true light.

      Like

    • Jolene said: “This is an example of a posting where people put what ever is conjured up in their mind on the internet and act as if it is truth or gospel. From these postings of Minority , I see all these sources of all these philosophies of all these men, all half baked and adding to the confusion of the earth.

      “Jesus is not our Eternal Father as Minority claims …”

      Mosiah 16:15 Teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father. Amen.

      Alma 11
      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;

      Sister Jolene, I love your avatar.

      Now remember, and take Abinidi’s council, and do as Minority does, “Teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father.”

      Like

  20. The Revenger: You Wrote:
    “If you can tell me you know by the power and confirmation of the Holy Ghost then I will pray and prove them myself once again if I need with the eternal father of light and love. “God bless on your journey for REAL light and truth. I pray you will come out of darkness if you are in it on this matter and see the true light.”
    Based on these statements and those above, you seem to be shackled to the chains Minority has on you and Satan has on him…If a sign is what you ant, here you have it: From your words above, it is easy with the light in me to discern that you do not have the light and safe ground you claim to have. There is a condescending tone to your line of questioning. Since you asked me questions, I will do the same to you. Have you sincerely prayed unto the same Father that Jesus Commanded us to pray unto? Is He the same father that sent Jesus unto the world to be the Savior and Redeemer? Is He the same Father Jesus prayed to while he was on the Cross and in the Garden? Are you not doing as the others in the world do, taking a simple sacred truth and twisting it into falsehood? I can tell you that there is a difference between The Father and The Son (Jesus) and they are not one as the Trinitarians teach.

    Like

  21. Jolene,

    Thank you for telling me you have not prayed and receieved an answer.

    Like

    • Oh But I have. And the answer is in my last post. The Father and the Son and The Holy Ghost and are One only in spirit, direction, purpose and love. However they are indeed separate individuals with their own minds and hearts and intents. The Gospels explain this ever so clearly. It is the twisting and imaginations of man left to their own devices that create dead end paths meant for those bound and determined to cut corners in gaining salvation and sanctification. Intellectuals and Philosophers are a dime a dozen…Those who find the gate and stay in the path are very few. As a question of self introspection and thought: What have I done today to have the mind of Christ and what service outside myself have I rendered?

      Like

  22. Any man who claims to be teaching by the Spirit is claiming to be a prophet, because teaching by the Spirit is what prophets do.

    The Lord is, after all, the Spirit of Truth, and who would be interesting enough to claim to be teaching by a Spirit of Less-Than-Truth? Or to not be teaching by the Spirit?

    Of course, Nate does not claim to be teaching by the Spirit – he merely claims to be teaching what the Spirit taught him, which is not the same thing.

    It all gets kinda confusing when one realizes that some people, when they use the phrase “Holy Ghost,” don’t mean some other heavenly being per se, but rather their own ghost “made holy,” or, in other words, they’re listening to their own spirit.

    Ezekiel 13:3
    3 Thus saith the Lord God; Woe unto the foolish prophets, that follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing!

    Like

    • Log,

      Thank you for the explanation. I don’t quite understand what a prophet is but I can say that I have felt the spirit while reading Nate’s posts and have learned truths. It is the same spirit i felt while learned truths from other posts of comments from you, tim, the book of mormon, joseph smith and many other sources. I love to feel the spirit and learn truth. I dont feel the spirit or receive a confirmation unless its truth. All i was askoing is if Jolene has receieved and answer with the spirit and i havent gotten her answer. Just beating around the bush. If she did not receieve an answer by the spirit then i know its just her being judgemental and atacking my brother which is unjustified. Jolene Henderson did not answer any of the questions that I asked so I do no feel I need to answer anything she or he asked. Should be a two way street of respect

      Like

      • You are certainly welcome for the explanation. To be clear, I hear you to be saying you asked Jolene a question, not to understand, but to disqualify her.

        Like

        • If we respect those only who respect us, what do we more than sinners? For sinners give and receive respect amongst themselves. And if we ask questions only to disqualify, what does that say about ourselves?

          Defensiveness is a sign not of truth, but of weakness.

          Like

        • I am asking a question to prove all things like she says. I am open to hearing anything that some one says they have learned. I want to know ifs its an opinion that minority of one is half baked and a blind person leading the blind or if its something she claims to know. Pretty simple

          Like

        • You are restating what I heard you to be saying.

          After all, if you believed her in the first place, you wouldn’t have asked; she has answered and clearly you still don’t believe her.

          Like

        • Log

          If someone asks if they know something by the Spirit, and the person asked says “no,” doesn’t the answer (not the question) disqualify the person asked?
          I am not saying that is what has happened here but I want to know what you think. My understanding is that if a person has not been given pure revelation on a particular subject, any subject, then they have absolutely zero authority to speak on the matter. Is that your understanding?

          Like

        • Here’s what I think.

          If I were to ask someone online whether they knew something by the Spirit or not, I would be asking that question for the sole purpose to disqualify whatever it is they said.

          Why would I be doing that? Because, in the first place, I wouldn’t have believed what they said, and in the second place, I wouldn’t want to believe what they said.

          So why ask the question? Simple – if they say “no”, then I can say “A Ha! You Don’t Know What You’re Talking About!” and skip off on my merry way, trailing clouds of sour grapes.

          But what if they say “yes?” Well, I didn’t believe them in the first place, so I’m certainly not going to believe their answer to that question over what they said that I didn’t believe in the first place. I might then start accusing them of having misinterpreted or misunderstood the Spirit, seeking to undermine and dismiss their testimony, and maybe even say they are lying. Because, you see, if I displayed that pattern, then the real problem I’d be solving wasn’t to find what was true, but to establish that I Gotta Be Right When I Don’t KNOW That I Am, In Fact, Right.

          Recognizing the pattern, both the source and the inevitable conclusion, I simply don’t ask people. If I don’t believe them, I don’t engage with them. After all, if they’re right, I’ll find it out from God, and if they’re wrong, they’re deceivers with whom there is no point to discussing things. In neither case does asking whether they know what they’re talking about by the Spirit accomplish anything except for rhetorical purposes – it’s an act for the audience. I recall the questioning pattern that Zeezrom engaged in, and to what purpose he was asking questions.

          I recall the Amalekites.

          5 Therefore, as Aaron entered into one of their synagogues to preach unto the people, and as he was speaking unto them, behold there arose an Amalekite and began to contend with him, saying: What is that thou hast testified? Hast thou seen an angel? Why do not angels appear unto us? Behold are not this people as good as thy people?

          6 Thou also sayest, except we repent we shall perish. How knowest thou the thought and intent of our hearts? How knowest thou that we have cause to repent? How knowest thou that we are not a righteous people? Behold, we have built sanctuaries, and we do assemble ourselves together to worship God. We do believe that God will save all men.
          Alma 21:5-6

          Do you suppose they would have accepted any answer to those questions? But I tell you that by asking those questions they established the truth of the charges.

          And even if someone does, in fact, know something by the Spirit, that is not the same thing as being told by the Spirit to teach that something. Sometimes, people get confused on the difference. Just because a thing is true does not make teaching it automatically “of God.” Things of the Spirit must be taught by constraint of the Spirit or else it is not of God. Truth told out of order or out of season or out of context causes damage, and is a sign of self-will, not charity, meaning the individual doing the teaching is not founded on the rock of Christ. Defensiveness is a sign, not of truth, but of self-seeking and a mark of one who is to be avoided, from my perspective.

          Since you asked.

          Like

    • Oh log,
      You are silly. Who has claimed the Holy Ghost is their own spirit? This I would love to know it sounds like a crazy idea. Or are you just throwing that out when no one has actually taught that? It certainly wasn’t me so who is the culprit?

      Like

  23. When one doesn’t inquire with real intent or sincerity, they will receive the answer that they want and are not open to anything else. As Jesus asked, who is my brother….who is yours? If I receive an answer born of the Holy Ghost and yet you deny my answer and challenge it, then what spirit is it that you are receiving it with?
    If I say the truth and is indeed truth then whether or not I say I received it of the Holy Ghost is irrelevant. Truth is Truth. You can validate it with the stamp of approval from the Holy Ghost or ask in faith going to The Father and he will make it known unto you. If you wouldn’t gloss over what is posted or written but read carefully, you would see I wasn’t asking you a question. Your words are testimony enough of your hardness and your expertise in braille.

    Like

    • Mosiah 5
      7 And now because of the covenant which ye have made, ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you, for ye say that your hearts are changed through faith on his name; therefore ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters.

      One of many which could be cited which teach the truth that Jesus Christ becomes our spiritual father by adoption by virtue of the Atonement (if and when we become redeemed). Seems like you might be arguing semantics, Jolene. We can become his seed and he has become an Eternal Father.

      The original Book of Mormon text refers to Jesus as the Eternal Father several times, including these:

      Title Page (this survived later editing):
      and also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations.

      1 Nephi 11
      21 And the angel said unto me: Behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Eternal Father. Knowest thou the meaning of the tree which thy father saw?

      1 Nephi 13
      40 And the angel spake unto me, saying: These last records which thou hast seen among the Gentiles shall establish the truth of the first, which is of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, and shall make known the plain and precious things which have been taken away from them and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people that the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father and the Savior of the world and that all men must come unto him or they cannot be saved.

      Mosiah 15
      1 And now Abinadi saith 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.
      6 And after all this and after working many mighty miracles among the children of men, he shall be led —yea, even as Isaiah said, as a sheep before the shearer is dumb, so he opened not his mouth—
      7 yea, even so he shall be led, crucified, and slain, the flesh becoming subject even unto death, the will of the Son being swallowed up in the will of the Father.
      8 And thus God breaketh the bands of death, having gained the victory over death, giving the Son power to make intercession for the children of men,
      9 having ascended into heaven, having the bowels of mercy, being filled with compassion toward the children of men, standing betwixt them and justice, having broken the bands of death, having taken upon himself their iniquity and their transgressions, having redeemed them and satisfied the demands of justice.
      10 And now I say unto you: Who shall declare his generation? Behold, I say unto you that when his soul has been made an offering for sin, he shall see his seed. And now, what say ye? And who shall be his seed?
      11 Behold, I say unto you that whosoever hath heard the words of the prophets, yea, all the holy prophets which have prophesied concerning the coming of the Lord, I say unto you that all those who hath hearkened unto their words and believed that the Lord would redeem his people and have looked forward to that day for a remission of their sins, I say unto you that these are his seed— or they are heirs of the kingdom of God. 12 For these are they whose sins he hath borne; these are they for whom he hath died, to redeem them from their transgressions. And now, are they not his seed? 13 Yea, and are not the prophets, every one that has opened his mouth to prophesy that has not fallen into transgression —I mean all the holy prophets ever since the world began— I say unto you that they are his seed.

      Mosiah 16
      15 Teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, which is the very Eternal Father. Amen.

      Like

    • Wow I have missed a lot here. Interesting discussion.
      1. I have absolutely no problem stating that I am a prophet. The term has been twisted in modern times and in the church often when the word “prophet” is used people equate it to meaning a person that I should trust in all of his or her teachings. A prophet then becomes an idol and the person placing his or her trust in that prophet becomes an idolater.
      If you cannot claim to be a prophet you have no hope of exaltation and have not received the spirit of revelation.
      2. Jolene you will have to forgive me for not knowing whether val brinkerhoff is a man or woman. I have never read his books and have met women named val.

      When I state that Jesus Christ has become our Eternal Father I am repeating scripture repeatedly taught in the Book of Mormon as Jesef pointed out.

      In one of my prior posts I talked about Jesus imparting of his soul to us and mentioned (as does Paul) that those who impart of themselves to others become their fathers or mothers.
      When the atonement occurred Jesus Christ gave a portion of His very spirit (which was excruciating) to you and to me. This portion he gave was given eternally and if we accept Him as the spiritual Father of our spirits, which we better, He becomes the Eternal and Infinite sacrifice as we become members of His body.
      If we will not accept Jesus Christ as our Eternal Father His spirit will withdraw and we will find ourselves to be children of darkness.
      As far as saying things pleasing to the ear it would be simple to do. I would just regurgitate material from men of the past. That is pretty much what every LDS “leader” has done for nearly two centuries. That would follow after the very definition of insanity to expect the same doctrine to lead us to Zion that has lead no one to Zion before.
      Jesus Christ is my Eternal Father and I confess Him as such before the world. I hope you might consider accepting Him as yours as well.

      Like

      • Minority,
        Then who is The Father of Jesus? And why did Jesus say for those in the Scriptures” Do not pray unto me” But unto My Father.” Who did Jesus Pray to?

        Like

        • I am failing to see how your question relates to any of my comments but Jesus prayed to His Father.

          I never said Jesus did not have a Father.

          Like

  24. Log,

    Thanks for sharing. I often ask people if they know things by the spirit, even if what they say or relate seems to be true. I do not ask that question for the same reasons you would ask it. If someone claims to know something (especially if it seems contradictory to what I have learned) I ask so I know if they are speaking opinion or truly claim they KNOW and then I will pray about it. I can think of a few occasions, some even that I listed on one post, where the revelation seemed to contradict something I had learned and I was surprised to learn by the spirit that they really did receive the revelation they claimed, then I can seek further understanding. If there is something someone claims as revelation and I do not already know or understand that concept I make a habit of praying about it.
    Log your reasoning for a couple of your statements brings me to ask you another question.
    Am I to assume that you log, are not writing by the spirit in your posts because you don’t claim to be writing by the spirit in your posts? If you have claimed it in one post, should I assume in the next if you do not make the same claim it is because you did not write with the spirit?
    I aboluteky agree that writing something you know to be true by the spirit, and writing something by the spirit are two different things.

    Like

    • Actually, Nate, you just affirmed that you do, in fact, apply the reasoning I outlined. I will explain how.

      You affirmed you ask because you don’t believe them. And whether they were speaking by the Spirit or not, God would tell you if you prayed, no matter what they answered, so there is no valid, truth-seeking reason to ask them; of course, truths can be spoken without the Spirit, therefore their answer is literally beside the point. It is therefore asked to disqualify – to gain a pretext to excuse oneself from having to investigate further.

      So don’t ask. Just skip to the end – if you don’t believe, then believe not. No need to announce it or put anyone on the spot. If you believe, then rejoice!

      Everyone may make whatever assumptions about my writings they wish.

      D&C 121:41-44
      41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

      42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—

      43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;

      44 That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.

      The only power or influence that can or ought to be maintained by a priest is persuasion (broadly construed [hi, Tim!]).

      All may choose for themselves how to regard my writings; they may freely reject them or freely accept them; I make no claims to authority. I find it irritating when someone assays to compel or coerce my assent to their views by claiming to prophesy in relating them – whether by saying “Thus Saith The Lord” or “I’m Speaking By The Spirit,” it is the same – therefore I do not lay that burden upon anyone, and neither do I tell anyone to pray about what I write. Either we are to be esteemed as equals, and in our words and deeds we are building each other up, or some are more equal than others – and I despise inequality.

      What if we left the mysteries of the kingdom alone unless bidden of God to speak of them? What if we all sustained and supported one another in walking in the paths of the Lord? What if we indeed did love our neighbor as though they were ourselves?

      Like

      • See log you just made a lot of declarative statements. One was regarding my intent, which clearly was opposed to the intentions I stated in my comment before, and so you have implied that I was wrong about my intentions, which seems to go against much of what you teach.
        Log, the truth is that I don’t simply believe anything. It would not be a wise course for anyone to pursue to just believe something based on anything but a witness from the Holy Ghost. It is what has put countless people in bondage. Belief of something without a witness of the Holy Ghost is setting someone up for believing a falsehood, and then if that belief is held and kept it becomes an idol, and then the person does not even remember that they don’t actually know the truth of the thing they have chosen to believe but they think they do because it seems to match up with something else the spirit has told then even though their belief is a philosophy of men mingled with truth. Then if enough people believe in enough things that they haven’t received a revelation on, you have a religion where people have a lot of truth confirmed to them, and the rest they simply believe and yet they just think they know it’s all true because of the spirit confirming the true things about their other beliefs, and then at last you arrive at modern day Mormonism, where people continually testify of things God never told them, and use “scriptures” as authoritative when God has never confirmed the truth of the verses they use, nor the interpretation of many of the true scriptures they use.
        Do you not see any sense at all in the idea that we shouldn’t believe something that the spirit has not confirmed to us?

        Like

        • About your intent, you were pretty clear as I understand English.

          If someone claims to know something (especially if it seems contradictory to what I have learned)…. if they … truly claim they KNOW … then I will pray about it.

          Emphasis and ellipses added for clarity. Again, their answer bears no causal relation with the truth of whatever proposition they advance.

          As a definition, knowledge is simply the personal record of experience (ie, the memory of that which has been experienced). I know only that which I have a record of experiencing. Nothing else is knowledge.

          When a man says something to me, I do not know what he is claiming. The contents of his speech are, to me, simply a report. He may claim knowledge in his report, but I do not know that he has experienced what he claims to have experienced. I may believe his report, or I may disbelieve his report.

          Revelation is experienced, therefore I may know things by the experience of revelation.

          Mathematics, under this definition of knowledge, is not knowledge, but is simply a game of logic, symbols, propositions, and hypothetical statements. Science is also not knowledge, but is a game of math and assumptions combined with data – or, in other words, “the philosophies of men, mingled with evidence.”

          Evidence, of course, doesn’t interpret itself – interpretations are only as sound as the assumptions brought into the analysis, and can the assumptions be known to be true? Can the assumptions be experienced?

          Just to look at one philosophical problem, can it be known we are not living in a simulation? Is it possible that we live in the Matrix?

          And so on down the rabbit hole.

          Like

        • The point being I can believe whatever I want – but I know what I know, and I divide between the two.

          And there is no real point to trying to persuade others to adopt our beliefs.

          After all, it is by doing that we gain experience and therefore knowledge.

          Like

  25. Thanks for your lengthy analysis. I believe the scripture to be true, because I know it is true, that by the Holy Ghost we may know the truth of all things, so I disagree that it is by the doing that we gain experience and therefore knowledge but I found it very artistic the way you wrote that.

    Anyway you would make a very good lawyer based on your skills of logic and use of interpretation, Or a very good defender of any orthodoxy of your choice. You have a unique skillset and seem to enjoy using it all the time. I find it quite repetitive and quite odd but I am glad you find joy in using your logic skills on many blogs. I acknowledge your prowess with the powers of the human mind and your masterful art with words. It is like a poetic dance of the voice of Stephen hawking mixed with a text book that has a lot of information. But it comes so easily to you it is impressive. Many readers don’t even know what you are trying to say because it is so intellectually superior to the normal faculties of the peon brain. Thank you for the enlightenment as always. My intent here is only to compliment and end this conversation on a high note. God bless

    Like

    • Nate,

      I speak Passive-Aggressive fluently, and so I hear your subtext. If you wish to avoid future interactions, it is as simple as not talking to me, and not asking me questions.

      On the other hand, if you want me to spell out what I am saying in more simple terms, I can do that, too.

      Like

      • For example, in discoursing upon knowledge, I was trying to help you to understand what I mean when I speak.

        You chose instead to say I’m wrong.

        Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.

        Like

    • moo
      I find Log’s statements in his posts very clear and straight forward and that his use of scriptures and questions are in harmony with the spirit. I don’t find him contentious nor do I find him pretentious. Your post directly above is acrid and pointed an hardly complimentary and if that is a high note , then you must be a bass in the choir. Log makes sense because so much of what he writes is truth. Light makes things discernible. Many of your posts are not in harmony with the truth nor the Spirit of Truth. Plain and simple. I hope that doesn’t offend you. It is grating on my nerves when I see someone say “God bless” when they have just laid waste to another in an unctuous manner.

      Like

      • Mc2dd

        God bless

        Like

      • Awe, were my motives so pure as those of Log,
        I should in an instant hie to Kolob.

        And what of the Spok-like logic?
        A celestial orb beyond the stratosphere of my thoughts.

        And If I too had Gospelink installed in my head
        My competition I would shred.

        But then ghosts of his opponents past
        Raise a spectral finger and gasp
        “Look! Look here,
        The failings that to you appear,
        In those you would make pure,
        Are but a reflection in the mirror.”

        Like

        • It has been a while since I have checked this thread … but I can say that Joseph Smith taught and it is in scripture, that if we are not willing to receive, (in other words be open to things we have no yet considered), our progression stalls. This is where “discernment” is crucial and “charity” …

          It is my understanding that the reason God can be everywhere all the time is because of the magnificence of his spirit … it isn’t that His spirit splits, but it encompasses, envelopes, etc. I have come to believe, and I am ready for the arrows to be shot at a me, that the Godhead is Father, Mother and Son … Mother is the Holy Spirit. So who is the Holy Ghost? Well, do scriptures not teach that Jesus gave up the ghost? I believe all religions and all cultures have pieces of truth and that we LDS have been taught incorrectly that we are somehow the ONLY true church. I believe that the Holy Ghost is our Higher Self or the I Am Presence that other religions speak of …When we come to earth we only have a portion of our spirit in our body. Who else is so vested in our eternal progression that our own self and this has nothing to do with selfishness. There are so many instances where the scriptures say “holy ghost” which should say Holy Spirit … It seems apparent that man has tampered with original scripture and understanding. I do not believe Joseph understood all things … But if we can all get ourselves “out of the way” (in essence get our own belief that we know everything) and be open to the spirit to teach us, then we will be less judgmental of the revelation of others.

          As far as the Angel is concerned attending Jesus, I also believe that Mary was present with the Savior. But also I believe the Father was present as was the Mother. If we realize that things are veiled and that the Lord keeps things hidden until a specific time, then we can relax and realize it is only through the spirit that we can be taught the higher truths. We then grow in our relationship with our God (Mother/Father/Jesus). We become reliant upon our relationship with them instead of the arm of flesh. The parables are a good example of Jesus veiling high truths to those who eyes and ears to see and hear. If all of this makes you uneasy and uncomfortable just put it on a shelf. There have been many things that I was resistant to when first taught, but as I sought further light and knowledge, many of those things were taken off the shelf and I now hold as sacred truths. If our desires are to know our Godhead, personally, they will lead us, give us experiences, help us tear down the walls of traditions and untruth, and enter into their presence. Each prophet had their ascension experience and were persecuted for their beliefs by many. None of the prophets were popular in their time. What makes us think things are different now?

          We are entering a period of time when a restoration of all truth will be made known … if we are willing to receive.

          I thank MinorityOne for his insights and his willingness to share and teach. We LDS are so tied to the “Law” (just like the ancient Jews), that we miss the higher law which is “love”.

          Like

  26. A friend of mine had a near death experience and got to be a witness to the atonement of Christ. She said that the Angel who came to help assist Christ was Father himself.i said to her”then it was no mistake that the Apostles fell asleep is it.” She said no.. I can see how it makes sense when Christ was crucified why he asked Father why he forsook him. He was with him in the Garden but could not be with him as he hung on the cross. It kind of makes you look at things in a whole different point of view. Something to pray about.

    Like

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: