Heavenly Mother - Conversation with Paul

In my post about Galatians 4:26, "Paul Francis" wanted to discuss the meaning of "Jerusalem."  (It's an important question for the World Mission Society Church of God, or WMSCOG.)  For ease of discussion, and so others can follow along, we'll continue that conversation here in the comment section (similar to my previous conversation with Cyrus).

Because this is specifically a conversation with Paul, to avoid confusion and complication, I respectfully request that anyone else refrain from adding questions and comments here.  You are welcome to email me, though, and I will save your responses for a later post (similar to the responses to Cyrus).

Ok, Paul.  First of all, some guidelines for us both:

• Each comment should be made in two parts, a response to the previous point and the raising of a question.
• Response -- We should respond to the question that was last put forth, keeping in mind the purpose of explaining and encouraging understanding and not simply fighting.  Also, please avoid using phrases such as "You don't understand because you are not one of God's chosen" (more examples here).  We can also respond to the previous response, as long as it doesn't include an additional question that needs an answer.
• Question -- We should ask a question, either to further pursue the issue, or raise a different point.  For the ease of following the conversation, please limit the question to one point.  Do not ask a question related to your response and ask a new question as well.  Though it is understandable to ask a couple questions if they are all very closely related.
• If we think the other's response is incomplete, inadequate, or needs to be clarified, first we should answer their question (give our response), then our question should concern the previous response.  In other words, don't avoid their question in order to focus on their response.  In this way, we should never be talking about more than two topics at once.
• Timeliness is nice, but life is busy.  A delay in answering should not be taken negatively or cause concern, unless there has been silence for more than two weeks.

I hope that is all clear.  Thank you for your cooperation, and now let's get started.  First I'll recap the last part of conversation on the Galatians 4:26 page:

Paul:  
Yes it is highly figurative. The apostle when it came to explain the new covenant did not mention Sarah or new law but just mentioned about the heavenly Jerusalem. To get a better understanding about the heavenly Jerusalem we must find related verses in the bible and read them together to understand and not in parts.

Genny:
He didn't say much about it probably because this passage was focused on showing how we are free from slavery to the law, and not focused on the "heavenly Jerusalem."

If you were wanting a "better understanding about the heavenly Jerusalem" as you say, I would not start with this verse at all. I would look first (and mainly) at Heb. 12:22-24 and Rev. 21.

Paul:
Understanding the heavenly Jerusalem properly does include the verse Gal 4:26. And the apostle did focus a lot and thereby described Jerusalem as our Mother.

And now I'll take the first turn here in the response/question format:

Genny:
If you read the whole passage (Galatians 4:21-31), there are 10 verses.  Only two of them mention Jerusalem.  Six of them directly mention Sarah and/or Hagar (two more if you count verses 26-27).  Five of them directly mention the sons Isaac and/or Ishmael (who was not named, but we know who he was).  Therefore, I would say his metaphors were focused on the women and the sons, not on Jerusalem.  That's why, if you were wondering about a "heavenly Jerusalem" I would not start with those verses.

My question for you... You had asked me before what I thought of when I heard the word "Jerusalem."  You agreed with my response that it was a city.  When you think of Jerusalem the city, what specifically do you think of?  Do you include all the people (inhabitants) in that thought picture, just see the buildings (like empty shells), or maybe just the physical location (as a dot on the map), or...?

Now it's your turn.  Please remember the two parts, response and question.

Mother God -- Responding to WMSCOG comments

I've received several comments lately from members of the World Mission Society Church of God.  This one mainly has to do with the existence of "Mother God."  I'll respond to it in parts...

(I have not removed any words from the original comment, but I have fixed spelling errors to help anyone needing to use the online translator.)

December 14, 2011, 5:17 AM, Follower of Christ said...

God bless brothers and sisters =D! I attend The Church of God. At first I was a hard devoted Catholic... Just went to Sunday worship for one hour a week.... 

Thank you, Follower of Christ, for taking the time to write to me.  I must say, I'm surprised that you describe yourself as being a "hard, devoted Catholic" but only went to church for "one hour a week."  Seems like you were missing something in your walk of faith, and I'm sorry for you about that.

Then...Well after a Family member Told me about MOTHER GOD I couldn't help but just hear him out, So later after hearing his "nonsense" at the time I would gladly introduce him to my Catholic Church... Well the opposite happened.. When I went I asked about Mother God and I brought my own bible so I would know if they changed something. Anyway Long story short all of the teachings from the church are in the bible. I told myself many times and prayed to GOD that if this was a false church I would leave, with just finding one thing changed in the bible... That was 7 months ago.. To this day I still have the same mentality. If I find one thing different I will leave, Because from what I know, The BIBLE is the word of GOD nothing else. 

You are right that the Bible is the word of God.  However, the WMSCOG does change things in the Bible, though not necessarily the words on the page.  They change the meanings (especially by removing them from their contexts), they miss the finer meanings that you can see by looking at the original language, and they add things not written in the Bible--assumptions that contradict the full message of the Bible.

Many say there is no where that mother GOD is mentioned.. Well allow me to Leave you all with some verses of the bible.. Not my words just GODS lol New King James Version

I'm glad you wrote this.  It shows the chain of verses the WMSCOG uses.  Unfortunately, these verses are taken out of context and don't mean what the WMSCOG tells you they mean.  It's dangerous to try to match up verses like this without considering the context and the full message of the Bible.  (I'll talk more on that later.)

Who is Jerusalem? 
Galatians 4:26 = but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.
Well that tells me she is in heaven and is my, your, our mother... But I still want to know who she is to GOD.

Galatians 4:26 is not talking about a particular woman in heaven.  Click here for a study on what Galatians 4:26 is talking about and how the WMSCOG misinterprets this verse.

Who is she to GOD? 
Revelation 21:2 and 21:10 = Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from GOD, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. / And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the Holy Jerusalem, descending out of Heaven from GOD. )
So I understand so far that Jerusalem is our mother and she is a bride.... 

You've already started out with an incorrect assumption from Gal. 4:26, and now you are trying to pair it with Revelation 21:2,10.  Ahnsahnghong himself wrote that the New Jerusalem was a place, not a person.  The New Jerusalem here represents the Church, just as it does in Gal. 4:26.  I know the WMSCOG objects to the Bride in Revelation being the Church, but I will address that in more detail in the future.

But who is she the bride to? 
Revelation 21: 9 = Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came to me and talked with me, saying, "Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb's wife."
Oh wow so before you learn that she is our mother and she is a bride, a bride to the lamb. 

Now this one is in the correct context.  Rev. 21:9 does belong with Rev. 21:2,10.  Yes, the Bride is the wife of the Lamb.  The Church is also described as the Bride of Christ in other verses.

Who is this lamb?
John 1:29 = The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of GOD who takes away the sin of the world!"
Oh wow well we all know Jesus took away the sins of the world and only he did that so he must be that lamb he speaks of right? 

Yes, correct.  The Lamb referred to in Revelation is Jesus.

Well is there more to Jerusalem? Answer Sure is... =D
Isaiah 62:7 = And give HIM no rest till He establishes and He makes Jerusalem a praise in the earth.
So we know now that Jerusalem is our mother, Gods Bride, and the earth will praise her... but wait I thought you only give praise and honor and glory to only GOD?
1 Timothy 1:17 = Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, to GOD who alone is wise, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.
Wow so if God said he will make Jerusalem the praise of the earth and we can only give praise to GOD, then she must be GOD......

Here you've matched two verses incorrectly again and made assumptions that don't fit.  The Bible does say that God will not allow His glory or praise to be given to another (Isaiah 42:8).  But does that mean that nothing and no one else can get any kind of praise?  Check these verses (using NKJV):
Genesis 49:8; 2 Samuel 14:25; 1 Kings 10:1-9; Proverbs 27:2; Proverbs 31:28-31; Ecclesiastes 4:2; Song of Solomon 6:9

You also need to see the context of Is. 62:7.  Keep reading.  Here's Isaiah 62:9,
"But those who have gathered it shall eat it [Jerusalem's grain],
And praise the Lord;
Those who have brought it together shall drink it in My holy courts."
It's not that Jerusalem is receiving God's praise and therefore must be God.
It's that Jerusalem is causing people to praise God.

By the way, did you notice the verse you referenced, 1 Timothy 1:17 says that there is only one God (singular) who alone is wise?  The only way this reconciles with the WMSCOG's insistence of two gods is if the second "Mother God" is not wise, because only one is wise.

My brothers and sisters all the verses were from the bible. The bible isn't about stories... Its a book of prophecy. As you can see it speaks of Jerusalem, How she is God and how she is our mother and She is God's wife... We are all God's children. Please open up your eyes.. none of this is a CULT.. all teachings are from Christ Ahnsahnghong.

I know it doesn't feel nice to have your beloved church called a 'cult.'  But if you want other Christians to consider the idea that they have been following the deceptions of Satan, then you must also be willing to consider the possibility for yourself.

If Ahnsahnghong was God, he (and the WMSCOG) wouldn't have so many flaws in his teachings, Bible references, and historical facts.  He wouldn't have ANY flaws, but he does.  Therefore Ahnsahnghong was NOT God.

I know it first sounds really insane and you have every right in the world to doubt.. I sure did at first... But Hey if it's in the bible I'm not arguing with it.. As of Ahnsahnghong , there is so much evidence and proof of him being the HOLY SPIRIT. =D Go to THE WORLD MISSION SOCIETY CHURCH OF GOD to learn more... all in the bible.. God bless brothers and sisters. =) http://english.watv.org/ 

There is so much evidence and proof of Ahnsahnghong NOT being the Holy Spirit.  Please look deeper into the Bible besides just the verses and explanations the WMSCOG gives you.

Thanks again for writing.  I do see that you sincerely want to follow God, and I hope that you seriously consider the material presented here.  I'm also sorry I was unable to answer your comment sooner.  I hope you'll be back to respond.

More WMSCOG comments and responses to come...

Galatians 4:26 -- Part 5

Well, I hope my internet browser is going to work today long enough to get this posted.  Now where were we?....  Ah, yes...

Galatians 4:26  "But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother."
So we've seen already some of the WMSCOG's misinterpretations regarding how Abraham repsresents God and how Isaac was chosen as heir.  The WMSCOG then goes on to explain how since Isaac was born from the free mother, so must we become a child of the "Heavenly Mother Jerusalem" (aka "Mother God") so that we can have the inheritance of eternal life.

But what is the message Paul really has for us in this verse?
I suggested it earlier, but if you haven't already read the book of Galatians, go ahead and read it, the whole thing.  It's not that long.  Then focus in again on the passage in question, chapter 4, verses 21-31.

First of all, Paul says in verse 24, "These things are to be taken figuratively...."  That means he's speaking in symbolism and allegory.  He's already warned us not to take the example literally--it's a metaphor.  "The women represent two covenants."  He tells us directly that he's going to use this metaphor to compare two covenants.

"One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar.  Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children." (Gal. 4:24-25) 

He is using Hagar and the present city of Jerusalem to represent the Law, the covenant with Moses.  Those who trust that following the law will save them are slaves to that law.

Ishmael was born to the slave woman, Hagar.  Abraham and Sarah knew God had promised them a son, but it wasn't happening.  So they used their own efforts to make it happen, through Hagar.  There was nothing special about Ishmael's birth.  It's not unusual for elderly men to father children.

Those who trust in following the law, are also trusting in their own efforts to save them, just like Abraham and Sarah, through Hagar, used their own efforts to get a son.  But Ishmael was not the son that God had promised them...

But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother....  Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise....  Therefore, brothers and sisters, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. (Gal. 4:26, 28, 31)

Sarah was the free woman, and Isaac, her son, was not born in the ordinary way.  Sarah was 90 years old when Isaac was born.  How can a 90 year old woman become pregnant and bear a son?  Only by a miracle of God.  When God promised them a son, it was Isaac he had in mind.  Isaac was born to fulfill that promise, and it was Isaac, not Ishmael, who became the heir of God's special covenant. (Gen. 17:19-21)

The descendants born to Abraham through Isaac were children of that promise.  By our faith, we Christians are considered the "spiritual seed" of Abraham, and we are heirs and children of God's promise too. (Gal. 3:26-29)

But what does Scripture say? “Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.” (Gal. 4:30)

The one who strives to accomplish salvation through their own efforts by following the law ("the slave woman's son") will not be able to share the inheritance of God that is only available to the one who has accepted God's gracious gift of salvation, by faith and not because of their own efforts ("the free woman's son").

Hagar and the "present city of Jerusalem" stand for the Jewish church at the time, which relied on following the law (think of the Pharisees), and likewise for all the current churches which teach that salvation must be earned by following the law.

Sarah and the "Jerusalem that is above" stand for the true church (not talking denomination here, but the general body of believers), which is in a state of freedom (see also Col. 2:14).

This fits with the theme of the book of Galatians.  By faith we are set free from slavery to the law.

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery. (Gal. 5:1)

Galatians 4:26 -- Part 1

It seems the WMSCOG is constantly quoting Galatians 4:26 to prove that there is a "Mother God":
"But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother."

What does that verse mean?  Does it indicate another God, the "Mother," as the WMSCOG claims?
Those are the questions I wanted to explore in my studies.

The first thing to do, before examining the details of the WMSCOG's interpretation, was to read it myself in context.  And not just the whole of Galatians chapter 4, but to read the whole book of Galatians--it's only 6 chapters long.  If I read the whole book at once, it will help me get a clearer idea of Paul's message.  (You can read it for yourself, too.)

This is a letter written by Paul to the Galatians when he had heard that they were turning away to other gospels.  He warns them not to accept any gospel other than the truth that Paul had given them, even if it appears to come from a trustworthy source. (Gal. 1:6-9)  He continues throughout his letter to compare the freedom we have in Jesus Christ with the slavery of being under the Law.

I'm going to pull out some verses and main points...

This matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. (Gal. 2:4)
We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified. (Gal. 2:15-16)
I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing! (Gal. 2:21)

ALL of chapter 3, here's verse 11: Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.”
and verse 18: For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.
and verses 21-22: Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

Comparing heirs and slaves, Gal. 4:1-7, here's verse 7: So you are no longer a slave, but God’s child; and since you are his child, God has made you also an heir.
Concern that they are turning back to slavery, Gal. 4:8-9...Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God—or rather are known by God—how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable forces? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again?
Using Hagar and Sarah to compare the Old Covenant and New Covenant, slavery to the Law vs. the promise of freedom through faith. (Gal. 4:21-31)  Here are verses 23-24a: His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.  These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants.

You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. (Gal. 5:4)
The acts of the flesh compared to the fruit of the Spirit, Gal. 5:13-26, here's verses 17-18: For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
and Gal. 6:15...Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation.

When you look at the book of Galatians as a whole, it is not talking about the existence of a "Mother God" at all.  The passage about Hagar and Sarah is just one example among many points in Paul's message that we are not under the regulations of the Law any more.  We are free, no longer slaves to obeying the Law!  We can know the grace of God through faith.

More about Galatians 4:26 next time...

Click here to go on to Part 2.