Mary, the Mother of Christ

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

See, it's things like this that should help Mormons understand why mainstream Christians are scandalized at LDS doctrines and have a hard time saying that Mormonism is able to fit within Christianity.

The belief that God the Father had sex with Mary shows how far apart the LDS understanding of God and Jesus is from Christianity.

That is not LDS doctrine - they are just as crude to you as they are to me and others. The doctrine of the Church is based on scripture - nothing more and nothing less. 

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

See, it's things like this that should help Mormons understand why mainstream Christians are scandalized at LDS doctrines and have a hard time saying that Mormonism is able to fit within Christianity.

The belief that God the Father had sex with Mary shows how far apart the LDS understanding of God and Jesus is from Christianity.

I do not believe it. I would be okay if it did happen but I suspect it did not.

[JLHPROF]

6 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

See, it's things like this that should help Mormons understand why mainstream Christians are scandalized at LDS doctrines and have a hard time saying that Mormonism is able to fit within Christianity.

The belief that God the Father had sex with Mary shows how far apart the LDS understanding of God and Jesus is from Christianity.

Are there really Mormons that don't already know we are different from other Christian sects?  I don't particularly worry about inclusion in a club that has tenets I disagree with.

4 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

That is not LDS doctrine - they are just as crude to you as they are to me and others. The doctrine of the Church is based on scripture - nothing more and nothing less. 

There is no such thing as LDS doctrine.  The Church takes no position on this.  Several prophets of the restoration have.

And the quote that started this tangent implies it still exists in the Church.

[Guest]

On November 18, 2018 at 6:06 PM, JLHPROF said:

The December Ensign states concerning Mary that "To the world, she was a simple peasant girl."

I know the apocryphal texts are precisely that - apocryphal.

But for all our Hebrew and NT scholars is there any evidence to support this description?  I  was always under the impression that Mary both before marriage and after marrying Joseph was not a peasant at all.  I've heard phrases like Royal Blood, lineage of David, service in the temple, and more.

So scholars and others who may know - was Mary actually a "peasant girl"?

If memory serves, it was (is) something like 14 generations from David, to Joseph and Mary. That is a looooong linage for all to be wealthy and still considered nobility. I don't have Matthew Chapter 1, in front of me at the moment. I am a bit immobile at the moment from surgery Monday, to take a look. Maybe someone could look it up? 

[Tacenda]

7 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

That is not LDS doctrine - they are just as crude to you as they are to me and others. The doctrine of the Church is based on scripture - nothing more and nothing less. 

Seems to have been heavily taught in the early church days. It's repulsive to me as well, especially when in the non-LDS Christian world they only know it as  a virgin birth. The quotes below by prophets/apostles are probably stemming from the Adam/God theory that BY purported for 30 years. So that is a lot of years for quotes to formulate, I guess. 

https://beliefmap.org/mormonism/mormonism-teaches-god-and-mary-sexually-produced-jesus

Mormonism says God impregnated Mary by sex

Mormonism teaches that God is made of flesh and bone and, while not articulated in any standard works, Mormon authorities have taught that Mary was impregnated with Jesus through physical sex with God.

 

Mormon Authorities

 

• Brigham Young (Mormonism's 2nd president-prophet): “The Father came down and begat him, the same as we do now…” [The Complete Discourses of Brigham Young, vol. 1, p. 321; February 16, 1849, Salt Lake City
• Brigham Young (Mormonism's 2nd president-prophet): “The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood—was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers,” [Journal of Discourses vol. 8:27]
• Heber C. Kimball: “In relation to the way in which I look upon the works of God and his creatures, I will say that I was naturally begotten; so was my father, and also my Savior Jesus Christ. According to the Scriptures, he is the first begotten of his father in the flesh, and there was nothing unnatural about it.” [Journal of Discourses vol. 8:54]
• Joseph Fielding Smith (Mormonism's 10th president-prophet): “Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God in the flesh. Well, now for the benefit of the older ones, how are children begotten? I answer just as Jesus Christ was begotten of his father …Jesus is the only person who had our Heavenly Father as the father of his body” [Family Home Evening Manual (1972), 125, 126.]
• Orson Pratt: the Holy Ghost gave her[Mary] strength to abide in the presence of the Father without being consumed, but it was the personage of the Father who begat the body of Jesus; and for this reason Jesus is called 'the Only Begotten of the Father;' that is, the only one in this world whose fleshly body was begotten by the Father. There were millions of sons and daughters who he begat before the foundation of this world, but they were spirits, and not bodies of flesh and bones [The Seer, 158.]
• Bruce R. McConkie (LDS 'General Authority'): “…our Lord is the only Son of the Father in the flesh. Each of the words is to be understood literally. Only means only, begotten means begotten, and Son means son. Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in He same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers … There is no need to spiritualize away the plain meaning of the scriptures. There is nothing figurative or hidden or beyond comprehension in our Lord's coming into mortality. He is the Son of God in the same sense and way that we are the sons of mortal fathers. It is just that simple” [Mormon Doctrine, 456-547, 466, 468.]

JOSEPH WAS ONLY MARY'S SECOND HUSBAND

 

Mormon Authorities

 

• Orson Pratt: The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated together in the capacity of Husband and Wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: … Inasmuch as God was the first husband to her, it may be that He only gave her to be the wife of Joseph while in the mortal state, and that He intended after the resurrection to again take her as one of his own wives to raise up immortal spirits in eternity.[The Seer, 158.]
• Brigham Young (Mormonism's 2nd president-prophet): “The man Joseph, the husband of Mary, did not, that we know of, have more than one wife, but Mary the wife of Joseph had another husband.” [Journal of Discourses, vol. 11:41]

JESUS WAS NOT BEGOTTEN OF THE HOLY GHOST

 

Mormon Authorities

 

• Brigham Young (Mormonism's 2nd president-prophet): “Now Remember from this time forth, and forever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. … When the Virgin Mary conceived the Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost… What a learned idea' Jesus, our elder brother was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in heaven.” [Journal of Discourses, vol. 1:8]
• Joseph Fielding Smith (Mormonism's 10th president-prophet): “CHRIST NOT BEGOTTEN OF THE HOLY GHOST … Christ was begotten of God. He was not born without the aid of Man, and that Man was God! ... They tell us the Book of Mormon states that Jesus was begotten of the Holy Ghost. I challenge that statement.” [Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1:18]
• Joseph Fielding Smith (Mormonism's 10th president-prophet): “The birth of the Savior was a natural occurrence unattended with any degree of mysticism, and the Father God was the literal parent of Jesus in the flesh as well as in the spirit” [Religious Truths Defined, 44.]
• Ezra Taft Benson (Mormonism's 13th presiden-prophet): “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in the most literal sense. The body in which He performed His mission in the flesh was sired by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost” [The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, 7.]

GOD AND MARY ARE TOGETHER JESUS'S LITERAL BIOLOGICAL PARENTS

 

Mormonism's Official Curriculum Material etc.

 

• “God the Father became the literal father of Jesus Christ. Jesus is the only person on earth to be born of a mortal mother and an immortal father.” [Gospel Principles (2009), 53]
• “[Jesus Christ] was able to make payment because he lived a sinless life and because he was actually, literally, biologically the Son of God in the flesh” [Messages for Exaltation: Eternal Insights from the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Sunday School Union, 1967), 378-379.]
• “He is the Son of God, literally, actually, as men are the sons of mortal parents” [What the Mormons Think of Christ, 44.]

 

Mormon Authority

 

• Joseph Fielding Smith (Mormonism's 10th president-prophet): “Jesus was not the son of any mortal man. His biological father was God, the Father. As Son of God, Jesus represents the Father and acts as his agent in all things.” [The Restoration of All Things, 61.]
• James Talmage: “Jesus Christ is the Son of Elohim both as spiritual and bodily offspring; that is to say, Elohim is literally the Father of the spirit of Jesus Christ and also of the body in which Jesus Christ performed His mission in the flesh.” [Articles of Faith, 466.]
• Melvin J. Ballard (Mormon apostle): “as to whether or not his was a virgin birth, a birth wherein divine power interceded. … And if God the Eternal Father is not the real Father of Jesus Christ, then are we in confusion; then is he not in reality the Son of God. But we declare that he is the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh. … No man or woman can live in mortality and survive the presence of the Highest except by the sustaining power of the Holy Ghost. So it came upon her to prepare her for admittance into the divine presence, and the power of the Highest, who is the Father, was present, and overshadowed her, and the holy Child that was born of her was called the Son of God. Men who deny this, or who think that it degrades our Father, have no true conception of the sacredness of the most marvelous power with which God has endowed mortal men--the power of creation. Even though that power may be abused and may become a mere harp of pleasure to the wicked, nevertheless it is the most sacred and holy and divine function with which God has endowed man. Made holy, it is retained by the Father of us all, and in his exercise of that great and marvelous creative power and function, he did not debase himself, degrade himself, nor debauch his daughter. Thus Christ became the literal Son of a divine Father, and no one else was worthy to be his father.” [Deseret News, 23 Dec 1923; Sermons and Missionary Services of Melvin J. Ballard, 166-167.] 

Edited December 6, 2018 by Tacenda

[JLHPROF]

10 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Seems to have been heavily taught in the early church days.  

 

Wow Tacenda.  Great references.

Quote

It's repulsive to me as well, especially when in the non-LDS Christian world they only know it as  an immaculate conception 

That's the part I don't understand.  Why on earth should it be repulsive for his physical body to have been created by the same method as every other physical body on the planet ever was?

It makes no sense to me to be repulsed that a baby was born due to sex.  

The idea of an immaculate conception on the other hand is pure nonsense, as is the doctrinally false idea of a spirit creating the physical when those with physical bodies have power over spirits.

Edited December 6, 2018 by JLHPROF

[Tacenda]

6 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Wow Tacenda.  Great references.

That's the part I don't understand.  Why on earth should it be repulsive for his physical body to have been created by the same method as every other physical body on the planet ever was?

It makes no sense to me to be repulsed that a baby was born due to sex.

 

I guess because Mary is the daughter of God? But you know what? I've often wondered if Mary could have been stoned to death for being pregnant and not married and maybe this whole thing is made up. But I still believe in Jesus Christ, or holding onto believe with both hands. So go figure.

Quotes below from this site: http://www.stephanielandsem.com/2013/12/unwed-and-pregnant/ 

If a man marries a girl who is claimed to be a virgin, and then finds that she is not, “they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her father’s house and there her townsmen shall stone her to death” (Deut. 22:20)

If a man has relations within the walls of a city with a maiden who is betrothed, “you shall bring them both out to the gate of the city and there stone them to death.” (Deut. 22:23) but if they were in the open fields, “the man alone shall die”, because if it was in the open fields, “though the betrothed maiden may have cried out for help, there was no one to come to her aid.” (Deut. 22:25-27)

If the maiden in question is not betrothed, the punishment is different. “The man who had relations with her shall pay the girl’s father fifty silver shekels and take her as his wife, because he has deflowered her. Moreover, he may not divorce her as long as he lives.” (Deut. 22:29)

 

Edited December 6, 2018 by Tacenda

[Calm]

Tac, Christ’s virgin birth is not the immaculate conception 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_Conception

[JLHPROF]

6 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I guess because Mary is the daughter of God? But you know what? I've often wondered if Mary could have been stoned to death for being pregnant and not married and maybe this whole thing is made up. But I still believe in Jesus Christ, or holding onto believe with both hands. So go figure.

Well we know even less about the creation of spirit children.  I am comfortable with Heavenly Father marrying Mary and fathering a child physically with her if he is her creator.

Spiritually we are all brothers and sisters but nobody seems to have a problem marrying and having children with their spiritual siblings.

 I think we either don't fully understand the nature of spiritual families or we don't fully understand the process of spiritual creation.

[Tacenda]

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

Tac, Christ’s virgin birth is not the immaculate conception 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_Conception

I caught that and edited. Thanks! ETA: Isn't there a Christmas song with the words "immaculate conception". Bugging me, and can't think of the name.

Edited December 6, 2018 by Tacenda

[Tacenda]

4 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Well we know even less about the creation of spirit children.  I am comfortable with Heavenly Father marrying Mary and fathering a child physically with her if he is her creator.

Spiritually we are all brothers and sisters but nobody seems to have a problem marrying and having children with their spiritual siblings.

 I think we either don't fully understand the nature of spiritual families or we don't fully understand the process of spiritual creation.

True that. 

[Tacenda]

8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Well we know even less about the creation of spirit children.  I am comfortable with Heavenly Father marrying Mary and fathering a child physically with her if he is her creator.

Spiritually we are all brothers and sisters but nobody seems to have a problem marrying and having children with their spiritual siblings.

 I think we either don't fully understand the nature of spiritual families or we don't fully understand the process of spiritual creation.

JL, the quote from from Ezra T. Benson doesn't mince words:  Ezra Taft Benson (Mormonism's 13th presiden-prophet): “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in the most literal sense. The body in which He performed His mission in the flesh was sired by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost” [The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, 7.]

[JLHPROF]

4 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

JL, the quote from from Ezra T. Benson doesn't mince words:  Ezra Taft Benson (Mormonism's 13th presiden-prophet): “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in the most literal sense. The body in which He performed His mission in the flesh was sired by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost” [The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, 7.]

I agree with him.  Like I've said many times it may not be an official doctrine of the Church but it has been widely taught in the Church by its prophets.

I get that it differs from traditional "Christian" beliefs. That's a big So What for me since I have no desire to match my beliefs with a religion that isn't mine.  I don't care that it doesn't match Islam or Hinduism either.

I don't understand why it is offensive other than disagreeing with a religious belief.

Edited December 6, 2018 by JLHPROF

[Storm Rider]

58 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Seems to have been heavily taught in the early church days. It's repulsive to me as well, especially when in the non-LDS Christian world they only know it as  a virgin birth. The quotes below by prophets/apostles are probably stemming from the Adam/God theory that BY purported for 30 years. So that is a lot of years for quotes to formulate, I guess. 

https://beliefmap.org/mormonism/mormonism-teaches-god-and-mary-sexually-produced-jesus

Mormonism says God impregnated Mary by sex

Mormonism teaches that God is made of flesh and bone and, while not articulated in any standard works, Mormon authorities have taught that Mary was impregnated with Jesus through physical sex with God.

 

Mormon Authorities

 

• Brigham Young (Mormonism's 2nd president-prophet): “The Father came down and begat him, the same as we do now…” [The Complete Discourses of Brigham Young, vol. 1, p. 321; February 16, 1849, Salt Lake City
• Brigham Young (Mormonism's 2nd president-prophet): “The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood—was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers,” [Journal of Discourses vol. 8:27]
• Heber C. Kimball: “In relation to the way in which I look upon the works of God and his creatures, I will say that I was naturally begotten; so was my father, and also my Savior Jesus Christ. According to the Scriptures, he is the first begotten of his father in the flesh, and there was nothing unnatural about it.” [Journal of Discourses vol. 8:54]
• Joseph Fielding Smith (Mormonism's 10th president-prophet): “Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God in the flesh. Well, now for the benefit of the older ones, how are children begotten? I answer just as Jesus Christ was begotten of his father …Jesus is the only person who had our Heavenly Father as the father of his body” [Family Home Evening Manual (1972), 125, 126.]
• Orson Pratt: the Holy Ghost gave her[Mary] strength to abide in the presence of the Father without being consumed, but it was the personage of the Father who begat the body of Jesus; and for this reason Jesus is called 'the Only Begotten of the Father;' that is, the only one in this world whose fleshly body was begotten by the Father. There were millions of sons and daughters who he begat before the foundation of this world, but they were spirits, and not bodies of flesh and bones [The Seer, 158.]
• Bruce R. McConkie (LDS 'General Authority'): “…our Lord is the only Son of the Father in the flesh. Each of the words is to be understood literally. Only means only, begotten means begotten, and Son means son. Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in He same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers … There is no need to spiritualize away the plain meaning of the scriptures. There is nothing figurative or hidden or beyond comprehension in our Lord's coming into mortality. He is the Son of God in the same sense and way that we are the sons of mortal fathers. It is just that simple” [Mormon Doctrine, 456-547, 466, 468.]

JOSEPH WAS ONLY MARY'S SECOND HUSBAND

 

Mormon Authorities

 

• Orson Pratt: The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated together in the capacity of Husband and Wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: … Inasmuch as God was the first husband to her, it may be that He only gave her to be the wife of Joseph while in the mortal state, and that He intended after the resurrection to again take her as one of his own wives to raise up immortal spirits in eternity.[The Seer, 158.]
• Brigham Young (Mormonism's 2nd president-prophet): “The man Joseph, the husband of Mary, did not, that we know of, have more than one wife, but Mary the wife of Joseph had another husband.” [Journal of Discourses, vol. 11:41]

JESUS WAS NOT BEGOTTEN OF THE HOLY GHOST

 

Mormon Authorities

 

• Brigham Young (Mormonism's 2nd president-prophet): “Now Remember from this time forth, and forever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. … When the Virgin Mary conceived the Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost… What a learned idea' Jesus, our elder brother was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in heaven.” [Journal of Discourses, vol. 1:8]
• Joseph Fielding Smith (Mormonism's 10th president-prophet): “CHRIST NOT BEGOTTEN OF THE HOLY GHOST … Christ was begotten of God. He was not born without the aid of Man, and that Man was God! ... They tell us the Book of Mormon states that Jesus was begotten of the Holy Ghost. I challenge that statement.” [Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1:18]
• Joseph Fielding Smith (Mormonism's 10th president-prophet): “The birth of the Savior was a natural occurrence unattended with any degree of mysticism, and the Father God was the literal parent of Jesus in the flesh as well as in the spirit” [Religious Truths Defined, 44.]
• Ezra Taft Benson (Mormonism's 13th presiden-prophet): “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in the most literal sense. The body in which He performed His mission in the flesh was sired by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost” [The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, 7.]

GOD AND MARY ARE TOGETHER JESUS'S LITERAL BIOLOGICAL PARENTS

 

Mormonism's Official Curriculum Material etc.

 

• “God the Father became the literal father of Jesus Christ. Jesus is the only person on earth to be born of a mortal mother and an immortal father.” [Gospel Principles (2009), 53]
• “[Jesus Christ] was able to make payment because he lived a sinless life and because he was actually, literally, biologically the Son of God in the flesh” [Messages for Exaltation: Eternal Insights from the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Sunday School Union, 1967), 378-379.]
• “He is the Son of God, literally, actually, as men are the sons of mortal parents” [What the Mormons Think of Christ, 44.]

 

Mormon Authority

 

• Joseph Fielding Smith (Mormonism's 10th president-prophet): “Jesus was not the son of any mortal man. His biological father was God, the Father. As Son of God, Jesus represents the Father and acts as his agent in all things.” [The Restoration of All Things, 61.]
• James Talmage: “Jesus Christ is the Son of Elohim both as spiritual and bodily offspring; that is to say, Elohim is literally the Father of the spirit of Jesus Christ and also of the body in which Jesus Christ performed His mission in the flesh.” [Articles of Faith, 466.]
• Melvin J. Ballard (Mormon apostle): “as to whether or not his was a virgin birth, a birth wherein divine power interceded. … And if God the Eternal Father is not the real Father of Jesus Christ, then are we in confusion; then is he not in reality the Son of God. But we declare that he is the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh. … No man or woman can live in mortality and survive the presence of the Highest except by the sustaining power of the Holy Ghost. So it came upon her to prepare her for admittance into the divine presence, and the power of the Highest, who is the Father, was present, and overshadowed her, and the holy Child that was born of her was called the Son of God. Men who deny this, or who think that it degrades our Father, have no true conception of the sacredness of the most marvelous power with which God has endowed mortal men--the power of creation. Even though that power may be abused and may become a mere harp of pleasure to the wicked, nevertheless it is the most sacred and holy and divine function with which God has endowed man. Made holy, it is retained by the Father of us all, and in his exercise of that great and marvelous creative power and function, he did not debase himself, degrade himself, nor debauch his daughter. Thus Christ became the literal Son of a divine Father, and no one else was worthy to be his father.” [Deseret News, 23 Dec 1923; Sermons and Missionary Services of Melvin J. Ballard, 166-167.] 

Tacenda, I am well aware of all of the things you have brought up....and it is still not the doctrine of the Church. The Bible says that the Spirit will come upon Mary. I think it makes sense that there was a union of egg and sperm; however, I don't think we need to go beyond that point. This is one of those things that are meaningless - the overriding point is the Jesus is the Son of God. How God the Father or the Holy Spirit accomplished such a thing is irrelevant to me. 

[Tacenda]

On 11/18/2018 at 4:06 PM, JLHPROF said:

The December Ensign states concerning Mary that "To the world, she was a simple peasant girl."

I know the apocryphal texts are precisely that - apocryphal.

But for all our Hebrew and NT scholars is there any evidence to support this description?  I  was always under the impression that Mary both before marriage and after marrying Joseph was not a peasant at all.  I've heard phrases like Royal Blood, lineage of David, service in the temple, and more.

So scholars and others who may know - was Mary actually a "peasant girl"?

http://www.womeninthebible.net/bible-people/mary-of-nazareth/ This was an interesting read and it made me feel like I was there. It mentions further on almost 3/4 of the article that she was a peasant girl.

[katherine the great]

On 11/18/2018 at 4:06 PM, JLHPROF said:

The December Ensign states concerning Mary that "To the world, she was a simple peasant girl."

I know the apocryphal texts are precisely that - apocryphal.

But for all our Hebrew and NT scholars is there any evidence to support this description?  I  was always under the impression that Mary both before marriage and after marrying Joseph was not a peasant at all.  I've heard phrases like Royal Blood, lineage of David, service in the temple, and more.

So scholars and others who may know - was Mary actually a "peasant girl"?

I think the Ensign is correct. She was from a very small, rural village in the Galilee so certainly to most people from Judea she would have been considered to be a peasant girl.  The Nazareth cemetery boundaries have been determined through excavation so we know the perimeters of the 1st century village and it was very small and modest. If Mary knew how to read, this would have been very unusual. But she was humble and righteous. I seriously doubt she came from a family with much if any wealth or education and that's really part of the beautiful irony of the story. Jesus (the King of all) would have to be born into very humble circumstances and He was.

[Stargazer]

On ‎12‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 6:31 PM, MiserereNobis said:

See, it's things like this that should help Mormons understand why mainstream Christians are scandalized at LDS doctrines and have a hard time saying that Mormonism is able to fit within Christianity.

Well, we're already reviled for several other things, quite apart from any beliefs about the conception of the Savior, so what's one more?  In for a penny; in for a pound.

On ‎12‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 6:31 PM, MiserereNobis said:

The belief that God the Father had sex with Mary shows how far apart the LDS understanding of God and Jesus is from Christianity.

I know that within Roman Catholicism Mary is an overwhelmingly special person, and considered to be pretty much untouchably pure.  So it doesn't surprise me that the belief as you describe it sounds horrifying.

It also needn't be the case that it happened that way. I mean, some of the past leaders of the LDS church were just as ignorant of genetics as the rest of pre-Industrial civilization, and could not imagine that conception could occur without some kind of "meetup".  One can question how it happened until well after the cows come home, but there is no question that Jesus was conceived, and since his body was male, it was necessary that a male haploid gamete be somehow combined with Mary's female haploid gamete.  And that needn't have involved sex at all.  If the resurrected Christ can appear to his apostles without opening the door to the room -- just showing up -- then God can introduce the needed male gamete to Mary's ovum to produce the male zygote which grows into the infant Jesus.  All without any kind of overt physical act.  And Mary remains untouchably pure.

Would that be a horrifying belief, too?  Or must it involve some kind of indescribable act of supernatural legerdemain?  Would it be any less a miracle?

[bluebell]

On 12/5/2018 at 11:31 AM, MiserereNobis said:

See, it's things like this that should help Mormons understand why mainstream Christians are scandalized at LDS doctrines and have a hard time saying that Mormonism is able to fit within Christianity.

The belief that God the Father had sex with Mary shows how far apart the LDS understanding of God and Jesus is from Christianity.

There are very few members of the church who believe this. Very few.  As such it really doesn't have much of an impact on our understanding of God and Jesus.

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

There are very few members of the church who believe this. Very few.  As such it really doesn't have much of an impact on our understanding of God and Jesus.

I didn't even think of this at all in my very early years of the church.  It was brought up in Seminary (1974)...and I was swayed the other way...that is that there was sex...because of divine law and nature.  So which is it in the Church?

[bluebell]

15 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I didn't even think of this at all in my very early years of the church.  It was brought up in Seminary (1974)...and I was swayed the other way...that is that there was sex...because of divine law and nature.  So which is it in the Church?

The only teaching that the church has is that Jesus is the biological son of both Mary and God the Father.  Everything beyond that (such as how that happened) is speculation.  Different leaders have taught different things at different times, based on their interpretation of certain verses of scripture.

[Kevin Christensen]

For those who like to go to sources, Nibley once wrote an interesting essay on Early Accounts of Jesus's Childhood.  Notice his comments on the Infancy Gospel of James, a very early account.

https://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1104&index=2

Margaret Barker has also explored the early sources in Christmas: The Original Story:

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Publications/Christmas.htm

I reviewed it here:

http://www.thinlyveiled.com/kchristensen/ChristmasStory.pdf

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

Different leaders have taught different things at different times, based on their interpretation of certain verses of scripture.

And likely their understanding of biology and the possibilities that science opens up as it progresses. The more nonsexual options are used in our own culture to create children, the more that magic/supernatural turns into potential future technology (think transporters), the less it is required to use sex as an explanation if they feel a need to explain it and not just leave it at "it is a mystery".  

Saints in general are fond, imo, of concrete explanations and may find it hard to just leave stuff at "we don't know".  I don't think an attitude of appreciating mystery is cultivated much in our faith.

Edited December 7, 2018 by Calm

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, Calm said:

And likely their understanding of biology and the possibilities that science opens up as it progresses. The more nonsexual options are used in our own culture to create children, the more magic turns into potential future technology (think transporters), the less it is required to use sex as an explanation if they feel a need to explain it and not just leave it at "it is a mystery".  

Saints in general are fond, imo, of concrete explanations and may find it hard to just leave stuff at "we don't know".  I don't think an attitude of appreciating mystery is cultivated much in our faith.

That’s a good point. Back in BY’s day, the only way to create biological children was through sex. It makes sense that he and others would extrapolate that sex was required from scriptures.

But now we know that sex isn’t necessary at all. Babies are born all the time whose biological parents never had sex.  We know sex isn’t required so it changes how we interpreted certain verses. 

Edited December 7, 2018 by bluebell

[theplains]

On 12/4/2018 at 8:34 PM, JLHPROF said:

Exactly what you think it means.  

It's not exactly that simple. When I say Jesus Christ, I mean the Eternal God; one that never became God.
When I ask Mormons who Jesus Christ is, the typical answer is that he is the first spirit child of heavenly
parents. When I read LDS Church material, I further discover that he was not always God but progressed
into become one when he reached a certain level of intelligence.

So I think its a better idea to get a Mormon's viewpoint instead of taking some heat (from some) and tell
you what I think it might mean 🙂

Thanks,
Jim

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, theplains said:

It's not exactly that simple. When I say Jesus Christ, I mean the Eternal God; one that never became God.
When I ask Mormons who Jesus Christ is, the typical answer is that he is the first spirit child of heavenly
parents. When I read LDS Church material, I further discover that he was not always God but progressed
into become one when he reached a certain level of intelligence.

So I think its a better idea to get a Mormon's viewpoint instead of taking some heat (from some) and tell
you what I think it might mean 🙂

Thanks,
Jim

What you apparently fail to realize is the Bible teaches us that God can remain God but still go through phases of existence where His godhood is hidden and not apparent. For example, how do you think the 2 year-old God, Jesus Christ, compares in spiritual wisdom, knowledge, power and capability to the now resurrected Christ who stands glorified in heaven at the right hand of God? The question you need to answer is how Jesus of Nazareth could fully be God on the day his second birthday when He had not yet grown sufficiently in wisdom knowledge and stature to be able to accomplish all the things he was expected to accomplish as God, including the infinite atoning sacrifice to atone for our sins?  How can the already perfect God be made perfect through experiencing suffering if He’s already perfect in every way?

“For it became him for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.” Hebrews 2:10