The Virginity of Mary

[saemo]

Please use the "Reply" button. It just isn't very hard to do. I'm as old as you are, not nearly as smart (by your account), and manage it pretty well. No one knows what you're talking about.

It is torture, too, to be constrained from telling other what you have discovered and know to be true. Having a Cardinal refuse to even look through a telescope and observe the features of the Moon (as I recall the incident from my biography of Galileo), to be put in a sort of scientific Limbo, and have your books burnt would be a psychological torture for a brilliant man. He built on the works of others, and it is the nature of science to expect others to advance yours, as well.

Lehi

So melodramatic.

"A Cardindal", being the imperative point here. Galileo had the support of others, including a Cardinal who supported Galileo, his writings, and eventually became Pope Urban VIII.

But keep on keeping on with the persecution complex being projected onto Galileo. His house imprisonment, while certainly not ideal, was not that of a medieval prison. He lived in luxury, confined to his house and that of friends.

I'd say the greatest torture was most likely not being allowed to teach any longer.

[thesometimesaint]

saemo:

I have no problem with Catholics, or their religion. The Protestant Reformation was no fun either, and the list of their atrocities is just as long as the Catholics. The LDS had their MMM. Though I must say that MMM was never approved of by the Church. They all do a lot of good in this sad tired world. But history is history, and I'm not going to whitewash it just to make someone feel good. I did the same in my practice: "Yes, bad things happened to you. Now what are you going to do for the rest of your life?".

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Should Mary be considered one of Heavenly Fathers plural wives?

Phaedrus

NO!

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I don't see a difference.

Apologetics should be based on facts.

It has been my experience that Apologetics seeks to defend every past behavior, no matter how wrong headed. Maybe well meaning would be a better way to put it.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I'm not blind, I just cannot figure out how this could be repulsive unless sexual intercourse itself is repulsive: God said that sex was "very good". Jesus is His Son. Children are the product of sexual union.

Lehi

If man can figure out a way to artificially inseminate, our Father is way ahead of the curve. I find it completely repulsive that God our Father needed to resort to this…this kind of suggestion (if that is what you are suggesting) just fuels our enemies. And though he be a God if this is the way Mary was impregnated then she was not a virgin and God violated his own laws. Which he cannot and will not do…or he is not God.

[LeSellers]

NO!

This kind of thing is why I do not pay any attention to phaedrus ut. There's no content there, just vitriol

Lehi

[LeSellers]

If man can figure out a way to artificially inseminate, our Father is way ahead of the curve. I find it completely repulsive that God our Father needed to resort to this…this kind of suggestion (if that is what you are suggesting) just fuels our enemies.

I'm not suggesting anything except that sex is not wicked, nor is it repulsive.

And though he be a God if this is the way Mary was impregnated then she was not a virgin and God violated his own laws. Which he cannot and will not do…or he is not God.

There are many ways to understand "almah", not all of them involve sexual naïveté. In fact, not many of them at all.

I don't know all of God's laws, and I hazard to guess that no one else on the planet does, either. Those I know, I may not interpret correctly, and even when I do interpret them aright, I may not apply them perfectly.

Lehi

[phaedrus ut]

This kind of thing is why I do not pay any attention to phaedrus ut. There's no content there, just vitriol

Lehi

It's amazing that I've been able to last posting here for 6+ years without any content.... just vitriol. All that time with out being suspended, banned, or even warned. I suspect I'm slipping underneath the radar.

Back to my original question it wasn't meant to be vitriolic in the least. There are many leading Latter Day Saints, including many past prophets, who believed that the conception of Jesus was one of the flesh. If in fact that was the case should she be considered as a plural wive of God? If not is there a exception between carnal relations between Gods and mortals?

Phaedrus

// I don't think that those who believe that the conception was strictly of the spirit need to entertain such speculation.

[thesometimesaint]

Lehi:

All I've ever claimed is to be smarter that the average bear. But then again bears aren't very smart.

[Calm]

But, I think Calmoriah did a fairly good job, other than, we don't view God as an animal.

Just to be clear, I was equating mankind to animals and God to the human in an analogy to demonstrate the inappropriateness of the relationship. Add-on: just to be double clear, I am not saying the relationship of Man to God is the same as the relationship of animals to God, see below for hopeful full clarity.

[Calm]

For Catholic virginity is more than a description of never having a sexual relationship, it is a state that one chooses to live. LDS don't have this concept, and as far as I can tell, are unable to understand it. Applying to this state a sense that sexual relationships are bad, which, no Catholic believes.

I wouldn't say that, we use "chastity" as a very similar concept, though it can include having sexual relations inside of a marriage.

I agree that suggesting that a reverence for choosing virginity as a way to dedicate oneself more fully to the Lord equals a belief that sexual relationships are bad is inaccurate. For one thing, something doesn't have to be bad for something else to be better. For another thing, in the case of the Catholic Church that ignores a whole lot of teachings about the sacrament of marriage and the sacredness of it.

[Calm]

But she was not His physical daughter.

Can you not see that any such relationship might be difficult for some to accept? Would you find it acceptable for a father to have a physical relationship with his adopted daughter even though she was not his physical daughter? It is the relationship of father to daughter that is at issue for them, not the specifics.

Yet this relationship produced a Man, so it's far from some sort of inter-species relationship.

Arguing that someone should be okay with an idea because of one's own beliefs and not based on theirs doesn't really work from what I've seen.

Getting back to the issue, why anyone would find a "physical union" between God and Mary problematic, remains unanswered, although not unaddressed.

Only if you insist on judging them by your own beliefs and not by theirs.

[Calm]

She didn't say God was an animal, but that people on your side of the argument see us as animals in comparison with God.

Actually not. I was using it as an analogy. I am saying the view is that there is a gap between God and Man comparable to the gap between Man and Animal. This does not mean that the relationship between God and Man is comparable to the relationship between God and Animal.

[Calm]

saemo:

I have no problem with Catholics, or their religion. The Protestant Reformation was no fun either, and the list of their atrocities is just as long as the Catholics. The LDS had their MMM. Though I must say that MMM was never approved of by the Church. They all do a lot of good in this sad tired world. But history is history, and I'm not going to whitewash it just to make someone feel good. I did the same in my practice: "Yes, bad things happened to you. Now what are you going to do for the rest of your life?".

But the topic of the thread is not history but the Virginity of Mary. Perhaps it would be better if we kept to the topic?

[Calm]

It has been my experience that Apologetics seeks to defend every past behavior, no matter how wrong headed. Maybe well meaning would be a better way to put it.

While there may be some that do so, it is not the case with everyone who engages in apologetics. For an example, look at how FAIR treats the MMM here: http://en.fairmormon.org/Mountain_Meadows_Massacre/Summary

[cion]

Would Jesus being born of a non-virgin make him any less?

[LeSellers]

Actually not. I was using it as an analogy. I am saying the view is that there is a gap between God and Man comparable to the gap between Man and Animal. This does not mean that the relationship between God and Man is comparable to the relationship between God and Animal.

That's what I meant.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

Would Jesus being born of a non-virgin make him any less?

Yes. The issue of His paternity would be in question.

Lehi

[David T]

Yes. The issue of His paternity would be in question.

Lehi

And what in the world would that have anything to do with his personal merits?

[LeSellers]

And what in the world would that have anything to do with his personal merits?

The question was would it make Him "any less", not would it affect "His personal merits"?

Lehi

[Eldwynn]

This topic really got me wondering what Jesus's chromosomes looked like... Man I wish we had modern biology back then. We could settle this once and for all!

[cion]

Yes. The issue of His paternity would be in question.

Lehi

What if the man she had sex with was known?

Even so, I don't see how a questionable paternity makes Christ less or lacking. It wouldn't have been the fault of Jesus anyway.

[Calm]

Even so, I don't see how a questionable paternity makes Christ less or lacking. It wouldn't have been the fault of Jesus anyway.

Can someone besides the Son of God fulfill the Atonement? Be the first to overcome death and be ressurrected? If yes and the only thing that matter was that he was sinless or had certain qualities of character, then I can see how his paternity would be irrelevant. However if one believes that only someone who has the power over death due to his inheritance from God the Father can fulfill the Atonement, than whether or not Christ was truly the Son of God is an important issue.

[Minos]

No Nazis. No sex threads. No insults. And no thread if this continues.

[LeSellers]

This topic really got me wondering what Jesus's chromosomes looked like...

We know that He had one "Y" and one "X" chromosome. The "X" came from Mary, the "Y", well she didn't have one, it came from Someone Else.

Lehi