Who Knows wrote:I don't know that the LDS church teaches that. I understand the background behind it, but I don't think the church knows a lot about it.
As a matter of fact, we don't teach much about it, and we don't know much about it. I understand the background behind your jibe, but I think President Hinckley was right.
ozemc wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but ... it is my understanding that the greatest exaltation that can occur in Mormonism is to achieve Godhood, and be able to have your own universe. Part of that is being able to populate that universe through the multiple sealings that were done on earth. In other words, there has to be a Heavenly Father AND a Heavenly Mother, or, as it seems more likely to me, many Heavenly Mothers.
The Godhood part is completely correct and official; the "own universe" part is more speculative. And, yes, I think the logic is plain that there has to be a Heavenly Mother as well as a Heavenly Father.
harmony wrote:If most of the relevant text were suppressed, that assumes an agenda by the people doing the suppressing.
I think that's likely, and would point to the so-called "Deuteronomistic reformers" as the people who probably carried out the revisions and gave us the text of the Hebrew Bible as we have it today.
harmony wrote:Do you mean the texts existed, but were destroyed?
That's an unprovable possibility.
harmony wrote:Was there some sort of political agenda to suppressing this information?
Yes, I think so.
harmony wrote:Did the ancient Levantines (whoever they were) worship her as a goddess or just acknowledge that she existed?
The evidence seems to indicate that she may have been worshiped.
Incidentally, "the Levant" is essentially today's Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Jordan.
harmony wrote:Were the men in power intimidated by the idea of a Heavenly Mother/goddess?
Possibly. I think other, more honorable motives may have been even more significant, though. For example, worship of Asherah seems to have led to fertility cults, ritual immorality, and the like. It needn't have, you might say, but it always did.
I apologize in advance that I'm going to be out essentially all day long. I call your attention to the substantial essay that I've published on this subject:
“Nephi and His Asherah: A Note on 1 Nephi 11:8-23.” In Mormons, Scripture, and the Ancient World: Studies in Honor of John L. Sorenson, edited by Davis Bitton (Provo: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1998), 191-243.
A much condensed (and, therefore, to me, much less satisfactory) version of the above article is available on line as “Nephi and His Asherah” in Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 9/2 (2000): 15-25, 80-81.