wife

[mnn727]

Originally Posted by skippy740

If a booklet is produced by the Church for the purposes of learning and instruction... isn't it considered an "Official Publication" for our edification and learning? Isn't it a source to learn more about the Gospel and our place in it?

)

Its a great source for learning, and its the reason they are published, but new doctrine will not be published there first.
If you can't find something in the Standard works, or a declararion signed by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve, while it may be 100% true, its not doctrine.

[mnn727]

Originally Posted by Kyra

The only proof I need is in my patriarchal blessing. If you're not LDS then this won't hold any proof for you, but as members of the church it should be more than enough. Patriarchal blessings are definitely not considered offical church doctrine, but I guess you could consider it a testimony builder on this particular subject.

My patriarchal blessing tells me that before coming to Earth I had a very special relationship with my Mother in Heaven and she is anxiously awaiting my return.

That's the only proof I need.

And that is proof for you, however its not proof for the entire Church. You are entitled to revelation for yourself and those you have stewardship over, but its not binding on anyone else

[mnn727]

Originally Posted by Wingnut

Don't we consider the prophets' words in the Church magazines (and especially the Conference issues) to be part of LDS canon? .

No we don't. We consider their words to be counsel unless they are cannonized. (signed by the F.P. and Qof12 and read either over the pulpit or sustained at General Conference.

Don't get me wrong here people, I believe in Heavenly Mother, but its INFERRED from doctrine, not doctrine.
That may be picky but its a very important distinction. Not everything out of a Prophets mouth is doctrine.

[Maya]

Just a tought. Think if it would be seen in scriptures through times, that ther is a HM.... I just wonder how many would have started to bow to her instead of HF??

[AnthonyB]

I'm sure this has been raised on previous thread (like so many of the points here!) but if your going to speculate on their being a wife then following LDS thinking it is also possible for Father God to have more than one wife. If Brigham Young a mere prophet of the Lord can have 52 of them.

If you have read the conflict in the OT between kids of different wives in the patriachal time then that adds a possible further dimension. Jesus and Satan may only be half brothers and their rivalry comes in part from the inherent rivalry found in half-siblings. (The various half siblings in my family don't get along that well) Some of the inherent conflicts between peoples may even be a result of having differing heavenly mothers.

After you've speculated on a several wives, then you equally have the prospect of God having parents. Then his wife or wives having parents and God having mother-in-laws!

As you can see the whole thing can get carried away with to ridiculous extremes. There is enough in the gospel for us to learn and do without imagining things that God has chosen in own wisdom to say nothing of.

[Maya]

If asked I say I believe we do have a HM. But id itturns out to be a wrong belief... so no problem... then I can say I was wrong. But as long as there is no prof otherways I believe.
As if I never been wrong before.... Everyone is free to have their opinion about this and no one is allowed to put down my opinion and dream and I most certainly dont put down others opinions if they dont thing like I do. But if asked I will defend my side of the story!

[DeborahC]

My personal belief:

Sometimes we just "know" things... without proof.
I KNOW, for example, that the dawn has a 99.9% chance of coming after tonight's dark.
I can't prove it... but I believe it.

I KNOW that after I exhale, I'll inhale and I KNOW that my heart will beat through the night, until the moment of my death. I can't prove it to you, but I know it and I believe it.

My life and the life of my son was saved when I KNEW the plane would crash, and so refused to get on it, even though my ticket was paid for. My father was very angry at me, but I KNEW it would crash, so I following my feeling, my belief. They died. We lived.

With this same feeling, I also KNOW that I have a Mother in Heaven.
I can't prove it, but I believe it.

It is one of the reasons I joined the LDS Church -- because they taught this idea (among others) that I already KNEW was truth.

[Islander]

DeboraC:

That is a very compelling argument. I agree with you completely.

I was trying (on my post in reference to the subject) to make a distinction, for the benefit of the investigators, between what is official doctrine and teaching and what we as members of the Church know or believe because of personal revelation.

[Heavenguard]

Knowing something is being aware of something that is a fact. Those aren't things you know, but rather things you have faith in. You can't know that you will inhale after you exhale, and you can't know that your heart will continue to beat through the night. No matter how minuscule the possibility, you can choke, your heart may fail (it happens)... But you have faith that you will continue in the way that has been proven reliable thus far, and that the unfortunate possibilities will not befall you.

In the same way, you can't know that there is a Mother, but you can have faith that there is.

Knowing something for yourself is having faith in something. It is a different know than knowing, for example, knowing that I am thirsty, or that I went to work this morning (barring Descartes).

[DeborahC]

From the Oxford English Dictionary under KNOW, verb:

c. To have personal experience of (something) as affecting oneself; to have experienced, met with, felt, or undergone.
-----------

Thus YOU may only have faith.

I not only have faith, I KNOW that my Heavenly Mother exists.