Is everyone equal according to God?

[Vort]

I am? No I know exactly what the priesthood can do including create worlds.

I don't believe that you "know exactly what the Priesthood can do". I doubt that knowledge has been given to men.

If you want to call that magic, then you can but I never did as it's not.

In the Avatar animated series (cartoon), the first episode introduces amazing powers called "bending", which allow the "benders" who wield those powers to exert amazing control over different things. One point that is stressed in that first episode is that "It isn't magic, it's bending!" And so what is bending? Well...it's magic. Just saying "This here isn't magic" doesn't mean it is not.

Now, I happen to agree with you that the Priesthood is not "magic" in any meaningful sense. It is the lawful control over all things that submit to it. But the way you refer to it certainly smacks of magical thinking. To wit:

when we die and we become God's

I assume you meant "Gods"; hopefully, we are already God's, or are striving so to be.

This is folk Mormonism, not LDS doctrine. We don't "die and become Gods", or at least, that is not what the scriptures teach us. We are promised "all that the Father hath", and our entire doctrine leads us to strive to become like the Savior. But exactly what does that mean? We have not been told in detail. You are basing your ideas on a Mormon folk doctrine that is not well-defined and may not even make sense in the way you're using it.

to be come God you have to be powerful. God's power is the Priesthood, so since females can't hold it

This is the "spandex suit approach":

God has power. That power is the Priesthood. Women cannot hold the Priesthood. Therefore, women cannot be like God.

Compare:

Thor has power. That power is Thor's hammer. Men cannot wield Thor's hammer. Therefore, men cannot be like Thor.

The Priesthood is not Thor's hammer or Superman's cape or The Greatest American Hero's spandex suit. Indeed, women do not "hold" the Priesthood as men do, but note that women are a part of the highest order of the Priesthood. This is more than merely enjoying the blessings of the Priesthood; this is a participatory part.

What does it mean to "be a part of the highest order of the Priesthood"? What are the implications of that? I don't really know. But it seems obvious to me that it's more than a passive reception of Priesthood blessings.

I believe we do not understand the basic order of how the Priesthood operates. We tend to think in terms of "power to command". I think that is not a correct model. That's the spandex suit model, and it fails on every level.

Will females be as powerful as males?

This, too, seems to betray a "spandex suit" view of reality. I believe that the question itself does not make sense. It depends on a power-structured worldview which I believe to be quite foreign to how God operates.

I love how you know everything

I appreciate the generous assessment.

and assume everyone else knows nothing.

You are mistaken. I make no such assumptions.

It shows ignorance in your character.

What do you suppose casting such aspersions shows about your own character?

You might want to lighten up a bit.

This may indeed be good advice.

Edited June 17, 2011 by Vort

[ruthiechan]

I think it's sad that anyone believes this.

Elder Bruce C Hafen from the Quorum of the Seventy states:

"The concept of interdependent, equal partners is well-grounded in the doctrine of the restored gospel. Eve was Adam’s 'help meet' (Genesis 2:18). The original Hebrew for meet means that Eve was adequate for, or equal to, Adam. She wasn’t his servant or his subordinate. And the Hebrew for help in 'help meet' is ezer, a term meaning that Eve drew on heavenly powers when she supplied their marriage with the spiritual instincts uniquely available to women as a gender gift.

"As President Boyd K. Packer, Acting President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, has said, men and women are by nature different, and while they share many basic human traits, the 'virtues and attributes upon which perfection and exaltation depend come [more] naturally to a woman.'

". . .

"Spouses need not perform the same functions to be equal. The woman’s innate spiritual instincts are like a moral magnet, pointing toward spiritual north—except when that magnet’s particles are scrambled out of order. The man’s presiding gift is the priesthood—except when he is not living the principles of righteousness. If the husband and the wife are wise, their counseling will be reciprocal: he will listen to the promptings of her inner spiritual compass just as she will listen to his righteous counsel."

It is my belief that this gender gift is commonly known as Women's Intuition.

Edited June 17, 2011 by ruthiechan

[Vort]

Elder Bruce C Hafen from the Quorum of the Seventy states:

"...Eve drew on heavenly powers when she supplied their marriage with the spiritual instincts uniquely available to women as a gender gift."

Even if we accept Elder Hafen's words at face value as if they were doctrine, those words do not say that:

Women have spiritual instincts, men do not.

[slamjet]

- D&C 38:16 "...and all flesh is mine, and I am no respecter of persons."

- 1 Nephi 17:35 "Behold, the Lord esteemeth all flesh in one;..."

- Romans 2:11 "For there is no respect of persons with God."

- Act 17:26 "And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth,..."

[ruthiechan]

Even if we accept Elder Hafen's words at face value as if they were doctrine, those words do not say that:

Then what do you think Elder Hafen means when he says "as a gender gift"?

[MorningStar]

I think it's sad that anyone believes this.

My instincts told me this would make you sad.

[Vort]

Then what do you think Elder Hafen means when he says "as a gender gift"?

What I think is irrelevant. Elder Hafen did not teach that men do not have spiritual gifts.

[Vort]

My instincts told me this would make you sad.

Hey! You knock that off!

[MorningStar]

Hey! You knock that off!

I totally knew you were going to say that.

[Vort]

I totally knew you were going to say that.

Mods!!! MorningStar is abusing her spiritual gifts! Make her stop!

Here is your new avatar:

[ruthiechan]

What I think is irrelevant. Elder Hafen did not teach that men do not have spiritual gifts.

Whoa! I never said that! That's totally different! If men did not have any spiritual gifts they would not have the faith required to properly utilize the Priesthood since faith is the spiritual gift that all other gifts operate under. Of course men have spiritual gifts. Women are given the gift of innate spiritual instincts while men are given the presiding gift of the Priesthood. Both are spiritual gifts, but of a different sort, yet both are dependent on our faith and efforts to live the Gospel. They are also complementary to each other and work best together.

[Vort]

Whoa! I never said that! That's totally different!

Let me amend my statement:

Elder Hafen did not teach that men do not have spiritual instincts.

(PS I like you, Ruthie. I hope you are not offended by me.)

[ruthiechan]

Let me amend my statement:

Elder Hafen did not teach that men do not have spiritual instincts.

(PS I like you, Ruthie. I hope you are not offended by me.)

Then that leads me back to my original question. What do you think it means when he says, "as a gender gift"? We are all born with the Light of Christ, so with that in mind, yes, we all have inborn spiritual traits regardless of gender, but I don't think that's what Hafen was talking about. People do not talk about men's intuition, they talk about women's intuition which is what I think this gender gift is.

(PS: I like you too. I'm not offended by you either.)

[Vort]

Then that leads me back to my original question. What do you think it means when he says, "as a gender gift"? We are all born with the Light of Christ, so with that in mind, yes, we all have inborn spiritual traits regardless of gender, but I don't think that's what Hafen was talking about. People do not talk about men's intuition, they talk about women's intuition which is what I think this gender gift is.

It is possible that women possess certain spiritual "instincts" that are rarer in, or perhaps even foreign to, men. But by the same token, men may possess other such spiritual "instincts" not available to women. Which leads me back to my original response (or an amended version of it): It is irrelevant what I think Elder Hafen meant. He did not claim that men lack spiritual "instincts".

(PS: I like you too. I'm not offended by you either.)

I am relieved to hear it. Several recent joinees seem to have concluded that I'm not a nice guy. (Maybe they just think I lack spiritual instincts.)

[MorningStar]

It is possible that women possess certain spiritual "instincts" that are rarer in, or perhaps even foreign to, men. But by the same token, men may possess other such spiritual "instincts" not available to women. Which leads me back to my original response (or an amended version of it): It is irrelevant what I think Elder Hafen meant. He did not claim that men lack spiritual "instincts".

I am relieved to hear it. Several recent joinees seem to have concluded that I'm not a nice guy. (Maybe they just think I lack spiritual instincts.)

That's true. Some of them think you're a nice girl. *snicker*

[Vort]

That's true. Some of them think you're a nice girl. *snicker*

[MorningStar]

I tried to make this my avatar, but it said it was too big. I'm too lazy to resize it.

[Suzie]

Do you know anything of old vs new doctrine?

Well, I cannot say "doctrine" but teachings of past Church leaders with regards to Black people come to my mind (as we discussed in other threads in the past).

[ruthiechan]

It is possible that women possess certain spiritual "instincts" that are rarer in, or perhaps even foreign to, men. But by the same token, men may possess other such spiritual "instincts" not available to women. Which leads me back to my original response (or an amended version of it): It is irrelevant what I think Elder Hafen meant. He did not claim that men lack spiritual "instincts".

Ya know, you might be right. I just had a thought. Women officiators in the Temple use the Priesthood for specific ordinances. Yet, we often say that men hold the Priesthood, and therefore women do not, even though there are specific times and places where women do have it for specific purposes (namely the Temple). If that is the case for the male gift of the Priesthood, then it stands to reason that the female gift of spiritual instinct also crosses over to men at some point at specific times and places for specific purposes too.

Also, stop saying it's irrelevant what you think Elder Hafen meant. I find it relevant because it'll help me understand better where you are coming from. Also, I value what you have to say.

I am relieved to hear it. Several recent joinees seem to have concluded that I'm not a nice guy. (Maybe they just think I lack spiritual instincts.)

Hm, lately, you have seemed to be at odds with people more than usual, and thus those who are new make the wrong assumptions about you because they don't have the history of Vortiness.

[Dravin]

I tried to make this my avatar, but it said it was too big. I'm too lazy to resize it.

There ya go.

Edited June 18, 2011 by Dravin

[Suzie]

Ya know, you might be right. I just had a thought. Women officiators in the Temple use the Priesthood for specific ordinances. Yet, we often say that men hold the Priesthood, and therefore women do not, even though there are specific times and places where women do have it for specific purposes (namely the Temple).

Hi Ruthie, I couldn't pass the opportunity to link to one of my favorite threads in this forum:

http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/36422-women-priesthood.html

[Dravin]

Also, stop saying it's irrelevant what you think Elder Hafen meant. I find it relevant because it'll help me understand better where you are coming from. Also, I value what you have to say.

His point is that a claim that women have unique spiritual instincts is not a claim that men have none, so it's not particularly pertinent what those unique to women spiritual instincts are. They could mean pop-tarts or they could mean certain insights, either way it is not claimed that men have none, just that women have unique ones.

Look at it this way. If someone claims women, and uniquely women, have blueberry pop-tarts it does not automatically follow from such a claim that men do not posses pop-tarts themselves, perhaps cherry ones. His objection does not require that spiritual instincts be any particular thing and thus why it's irrelevant because the argument stands regardless of if 'spiritual instincts' means pop-tarts, candy bars, cars, or spiritual abilities.

Edit: Knowing Vort he's not chiming in with what he thinks they are to avoid thinks breaking down into a back of forth of if said "spiritual instinct" as he may define it for you really is something unique to women or not.

Edited June 18, 2011 by Dravin

[MorningStar]

Hier ist mein Morgenstern! Es ist jetzt klein, aber es wird sehr viel schmerzen!

[Vort]

Ya know, you might be right. I just had a thought. Women officiators in the Temple use the Priesthood for specific ordinances. Yet, we often say that men hold the Priesthood, and therefore women do not, even though there are specific times and places where women do have it for specific purposes (namely the Temple). If that is the case for the male gift of the Priesthood, then it stands to reason that the female gift of spiritual instinct also crosses over to men at some point at specific times and places for specific purposes too.

I think this points up one of the fallacies in our Western thinking. We are deeply egalitarian, and as such we are impelled to believe that men and women are "equal", where "equal" pretty much means "the same". So if we see a situation where one sex seemingly has a gift that the other lacks, we automatically assume one of two things must be the case:

• The other sex also actually has that same gift, and we just don't know it (or it isn't currently practiced that way).

  Example: Men are ordained to the Priesthood, but women are not. Therefore, women actually do hold the Priesthood; they just don't need to be ordained to any office. Or: Women actually should hold the Priesthood just like men, but they don't today because we live in such a sexist society that wouldn't accept it.

• The other sex is compensated for their lack by being given other gifts or traits that are equal to, or perhaps better than, the topic under discussion.

  Example: Sticking with the Priesthood example, another explanation is that women don't need the Priesthood, because they are naturally more righteous than men, who need the Priesthood to make their pathetic souls a bit more acceptable to God. Or, in another incarnation, women have motherhood instead of the Priesthood, so it's really six of one and half a dozen of the other. (Or more commonly: Women have motherhood, which is actually better than having the Priesthood.)

Note that in each of these examples, the purported explanation is simply a way to equalize the station of men and women, or perhaps even put women in a superior position to men. Each of these assumes that there can be no fundamental difference in authority between men and women, so therefore the difference in Priesthood holding must either be illusory (e.g. women actually do hold the Priesthood) or otherwise compensated (e.g. women are too righteous to need the Priesthood; women have something equal to or greater than Priesthood power).

My shocking theory is that men and women are different, with different duties and different realms of responsibility. To say that one is somehow "better than" the other (e.g. motherhood is better than the Priesthood, or women are naturally more righteous than men) is an absurdity. They are not "better than" or "worse than", nor are they "equal" in any sense of sameness. They are complementary.

Also, I value what you have to say.

That's kind of you. Thank you.

Hm, lately, you have seemed to be at odds with people more than usual, and thus those who are new make the wrong assumptions about you because they don't have the history of Vortiness.

Yes, they are not yet familiar with my sparkling personality and witty conversationalism.

[Vort]

Hier ist mein Morgenstern!

You mean, as in The Princess Bride?