Yet at the same time look at 19th century LDS writings who see Mary married to God the Father. Further there is this image of the mythic of Eve in how Mormons see Mary. Perhaps more during the era when Brigham Young’s theology was still prominent.

Now today there’s this oddity, perhaps due to skepticism and worry about feminism and our repression of BY’s speculations on Adam and Eve theologically. The female divine is on the one hand tremendously important to us while on the other little is revealed the the tendency in the past to move beyond revelation (which is how the modern Church views BY’s A/G theory) is seen as dangerous. There’s this weird tension that perhaps applies to Mary as well.

BTW – the Revelation passage is interesting since I think it’s a symbol with multiple layers. That is the woman isn’t just Mary but also the Church.

Also compare Rev 12 with 1 Ne 11. There are some who see the two visions as tied together in some ways. Yet I think 1 Ne 11 is one of the more important texts in Mormonism. The tree of life vision of Lehi/Nephi tends to have a great place in our thought. The really weird bit in 1 Ne 11 is the tying together of Mary and the tree. Nephi sees the beautiful fair tree and asks for an explanation and what does he get? A vision of Mary who is also described as fair and white. I notice that when this gets described the connection between Mary/Jesus and the Tree/Fruit doesn’t get mentioned even though the one vision is the explanation of the other vision. Further the connections to Rev 12 get missed a lot as well.

Great post.

Aren’t Eve and Sarah (Abraham’s wife) prophetically named in the Book of Mormon?

(They are made known to the Nephites by their scriptures, which is sort of prophetic, but perhaps not the kind you were talking about.)

Thanks for the interesting post!

Chris,
I think that the question of “time” or “development” are not quite the best way to think about this issue of Mary’s virginity. The problem is that we just don’t know. Instead, we can speak of different traditions that are more or less contemporary. Luke and Matthew seem to speak of the virgin birth independently since the stories are so different, but her virginity is an important element in both. No other NT text mentions it, and if I am right that this Rev passage is a reference to the birth narrative, virginity is not an important element at all. So, when we see the theme of virginity, it is always in terms of her sexual status, not her youth. However, this theme is not important in other contexts.

Thanks! I most have been out of town last year when that was postsed.

Merry Christmas

TT had a post on the subject of the Virigin Birth awhile back. Try here for starters:

http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/2007/12/22/the-father-of-jesus/

Is it possible that referrences to Mary as a virgin have more to her being a young first time mother rather than actully being a virgin? I think that the virgin idea seems rooted in the belief that sex makes one no longer pure and therefore the Christ could only be born to a Virgin. I reject that concept of sexuality and therefore am having trouble buying the virgin birth idea, largely because I do not view it as needed.

I have been wondering whether the passive role given to Mary is part of the removal of women from importantance in the bible that took place over time.

Your post makes me think of the popular Christmas song “Mary did you know?” It treats her as being a clueless character in an important story. Yet, the Bible itself says that she was visiting by heavenly messengers.