The Conception of Jesus Christ

[hordak]

The Hebrew word Almah was translated in Isaiah to virgin

14Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Funny no one was concerned about him being called Immanuel:)

This same word was translated to damsel in palms

5The singers went before, the players on instruments followed after; among them were the damsels playing with timbrels.

and maid in exodus

8And Pharaoh's daughter said to her, Go. And the maid went and called the child's mother.

Much like English words can have multiple meanings.

In 1000 years will people argue the birth of Donald Trump?

"well the news papers from his day say he was a real son of a female dog"

BTW Virgin means not knowing a MAN sexually, Would God qualify?

Disclaimer: Nothing against Donald trump just trying to show how words have multiple meanings and can lead to huge misunderstandings.

[Faded]

Did Joseph Smith say that they looked like identical twins when he saw them? I know the scriptures say 'he that hath seen me hath seen the Father' but I didn't think that meant in a literal physical appearance kind of sense any more than 'I and my father are one' meant that they were the same person.

Yes, he did say that they looked exactly alike. Incidentally, he said the same thing about Adam and Seth. Like Father like Son I suppose.

[Faded]

BTW Virgin means not knowing a MAN sexually, Would God qualify?

God the Father, Man of Holiness. Yes, I think that we can say that the word "MAN" applies to Him. So the answer is yes.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Must reread Joseph Smith's account of the First Vision.

[WillowTheWhisp]

It doesn't say they were identical there. Could you please direct me to where Joseph said they were identical in appearance?

[h2001st]

How do Mormons believe Jesus Christ was conceived? I've seen and read a lot by non-member, but there is nothing from the church about it, that have been about to find.

you never found it in the Bible????

Palerider- as a Non-member, you have to understand we hear tons of media information from LDS, RLDS, FLDS, Church of Christ etc. and don't know the difference between these factions. I'm assuming x-girl was asking about Brigham Young's views in contrast to "mainstream" LDS views? :)

[Guest Alana]

So I suppose the real question is if Mary was the biological mother or not.

As far as Mary conceiving while a virgin, this doesn't throw me at all. Think of all the things Heavenly Father is capable of. Getting a little DNA in there without any hanky panky wouldn't be so hard to accomplish.

[h2001st]

As far as Mary conceiving while a virgin, this doesn't throw me at all. Think of all the things Heavenly Father is capable of. Getting a little DNA in there without any hanky panky wouldn't be so hard to accomplish.

LOL- very true! After all if He could will the Red Soxs winning the Series some years back... anything is possible

[hordak]

God the Father, Man of Holiness. Yes, I think that we can say that the word "MAN" applies to Him. So the answer is yes.

I would would have to disagree. Consider when people refer to the "depravity of man"

"the evil of man" "one small step for man"

It clear IMO Man would refer to the human species. In fact look at the Folet discourse(?)

As man is now God once was

This indicates he would no longer be "man" and therefor Mary could have had Physical relations with God and still not know a man.

[mikbone]

I gotta get back up to speed.

1) Justice - thanks for the post. Excellent Rebuttal

Christ was born via Eve's Seed - This is still consistent with my line of though. You might have to look at it from a different angle though. I was born thru the seed of Noah correct? If Adam and Eve had produced a embryo and that embryo had been preserved for 6000 years. And I found it. And placed it into my wife's Uterus. And it took. And a baby was produced. I could argue that it was from the seed of Noah. The DNA itself is from the same family.

How can Christ be mortal if his parents were immortal. This question is crucial... I'll skip answering this for now. :)

I disagree that it was Satan's plan that Adam and Eve partake of the Tree of Life after partaking of the Tree of KoG&E.

In Alma 12:26, Alma states that if Adam and Eve would have partaken of the tree of life they would have been miserable, having no preparatory state; thus the plan would have been frustrated.

Alma 12:21 & Moses 4:31 State clearly that God prevented Adam and Eve from partaking from the Tree of Life. "And thus we see that there was no possible chance that they should live forever." God knew what he was doing. He allowed Adam & Eve to partake of the Tree of KoG&E, but he placed a cheribum and flaming sword in front of the Tree of Life. It just was not a possibility for them to partake of the Tree of Life after having partaken from the Tree of KoG&E. This is significant.

2) HemiDakota and Faded

I love that Elohim, Jehovah, Adam, & Seth look like identical quads.

Hebrews 1:2-3, Genesis 1:26, Genesis 5:3, D&C 107:43

Edited March 26, 2009 by mikbone

[Ceebooboo]

This indicates he would no longer be "man" and therefor Mary could have had Physical relations with God and still not know a man.

:eek::eek::confused:

Peace,

Ceebooboo

[mikbone]

I greatly dislike the idea that God the Father had relations with the Virgin Mary and that the union of their seed produced Jesus. Its just wrong on so many levels.

God, the Father of our spirits, became the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh ...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, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father ...He had a lawful right to overshadow the Virgin Mary in the capacity of a husband, and beget a Son, although she was espoused to another; for the law which He gave to govern men and women, was not intended to govern Himself, or to prescribe rules for his own conduct. Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 158

These words appear to convey the idea that Elohim and the Virgin Mary had sexual relations as husband and wife, which produced Jesus Christ. This is the most obnoxious and offensive doctrine that I have ever heard, and reminds me of Greek Mythology. Jehovah was no Hercules.

1) Immortal parents produce spirit children - Doctrines of Salvation, volume 2, p. 68

2) There is no evidence that an immortal sperm and a mortal egg could combine. It defies logic. We can't even stand in gods full presence without being transfigured. Elohims sperm would have anhiliated Mary's egg.

3) Mary and Joseph are Married. Elohim is not some galavanting greek God.

4) If Jesus was a hybrid, which he was not. What would have happened if he had had children. (I dont think he had physical relations with any mortals during his mortal ministry btw) Would they have been 1/4 immortal?

5) If God were to sin he would cease to be God. Alma 42.

[X_Girl]

you never found it in the Bible????

Yes, but that wasn't my question, was it?

[X_Girl]

LDS authorities split as to the nature of Jesus' conception. Modern authorities (to the extent that they weigh in on the question at all) lean towards the "Mary was a virgin" view, but Brigham Young (president of the Church from 1846-1877) and some of his contemporaries did express their beliefs that there was actual intercourse between Mary and God the Father.

So that is were the stories of God coming down in his physical body for a night, came from? So does the church disagree with Brigham Young today?

[talisyn]

I greatly dislike the idea that God the Father had relations with the Virgin Mary and that the union of their seed produced Jesus. Its just wrong on so many levels.

Elohim is not some galavanting greek God.

5) If God were to sin he would cease to be God. Alma 42.

That bolded by me line is awesome. I love it. Yes, God is not some Zeus out to have a good time. He's not even some Odin out to create the class structure of the mortals. He is God the Eternal Father, and He is way smarter than all of us.

I can understand the eewwwness of the concept of God and Mary having 'relations' without marriage. It gave me a lot of problems when I was young. However, I have to point out there are a lot of things commanded in the Biblical times we are not commanded to do now...like slaughtering gentiles, stoning adulterers, and polygamy. Would they be sins now? Yes, of course. Were they sins then? No, because it was commanded.

I don't think (of course I just don't know) God and Mary had a physical relationship. I like your idea of surrogacy, to a point. I believe Mary is the mortal mother (DNA and all that) of Jesus because of God's supremacy.

Two words: petri dish.

[Hemidakota]

I greatly dislike the idea that God the Father had relations with the Virgin Mary and that the union of their seed produced Jesus. Its just wrong on so many levels.

God, the Father of our spirits, became the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh ...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, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father ...He had a lawful right to overshadow the Virgin Mary in the capacity of a husband, and beget a Son, although she was espoused to another; for the law which He gave to govern men and women, was not intended to govern Himself, or to prescribe rules for his own conduct. Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 158

These words appear to convey the idea that Elohim and the Virgin Mary had sexual relations as husband and wife, which produced Jesus Christ. This is the most obnoxious and offensive doctrine that I have ever heard, and reminds me of Greek Mythology. Jehovah was no Hercules.

1) Immortal parents produce spirit children - Doctrines of Salvation, volume 2, p. 68

2) There is no evidence that an immortal sperm and a mortal egg could combine. It defies logic. We can't even stand in gods full presence without being transfigured. Elohims sperm would have anhiliated Mary's egg.

3) Mary and Joseph are Married. Elohim is not some galavanting greek God.

4) If Jesus was a hybrid, which he was not. What would have happened if he had had children. (I dont think he had physical relations with any mortals during his mortal ministry btw) Would they have been 1/4 immortal?

5) If God were to sin he would cease to be God. Alma 42.

Concur with your first statement but disagree with the immortalize offspring are not spirit children but immortal children.

Mary was, using the NT term, 'overcome' by the Holy Ghost. OVERCOME is the key to the mixing of mortal and immortal chemistry. By what means, is not mentioned. But noting our own current technology, there is no need for sexual intercourse to do so.

Not being sealed on earth, He could not function as directed by the Celestial Laws given as a resurrected being. Think about this for second.....

[Just_A_Guy]

A lot of people say a lot of things.

We all have our speculations.

Some of them even being General Authorities.

Funny, when a GA speculates it is heralded as a revelation.

Did he say it was?

Did it end up as Scripture?

Yet, most of us "Mormons", stick to the Scriptures and believe them.

I agree 100%.

But I don't think we do either ourselves or honest investigators (like X_Girl appears to be) any good when we pretend that this stuff isn't out there. It is. We need to acknowledge it and, where appropriate, explain why it does not represent our belief as a people.

So that is were the stories of God coming down in his physical body for a night, came from? So does the church disagree with Brigham Young today?

For the most part, I would say that yes--they're probably extrapolated from statements of Brigham Young. To my knowledge, though, Young didn't go into any more detail than to say that Jesus was conceived the same way any other mortal is conceived.

The Church, to my knowledge, hasn't explicitly addressed Young's comments of late. Several notable recent church leaders have individually disavowed it, but I think the Church's official line is "we aren't sure".

[Just_A_Guy]

I greatly dislike the idea that God the Father had relations with the Virgin Mary and that the union of their seed produced Jesus. Its just wrong on so many levels.

. . .

3) Mary and Joseph are Married. Elohim is not some galavanting greek God.

True. On the other hand--as the recent threads on polyandry should make clear--there's a lot about divine marital practices that we just don't know with any degree of certainty. Also, a lot of our cultural ideas about sex arise from the old sectarian idea that sex is inherently sinful--an idea which our doctrine (if not our culture) repudiates.

What is it about the idea of an actual physical conception of Jesus that really bothers us? Is it the idea of Mary having sex with someone other than her earthly fiancee? Or is it the idea of God having sex at all? (Or is it the idea of a "power imbalance" between the immortal God and the mortal Mary--the same kind of power imbalance that leads us pass laws banning statutory rape and incest, and that leads us to frown on employer/employee relationships at the office?)

Regarding Jesus' parentage: personally, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Jesus was conceived by a physical act; and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that He wasn't.

Edited March 26, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[Hemidakota]

It doesn't say they were identical there. Could you please direct me to where Joseph said they were identical in appearance?

According to the book, "Joseph Smith the Prophet" by Truman G. Madsen, good book to digest when you have sometime, it reads,

The Prophet was not harmed by the experience; he was hallowed by it. Having seen the light, he now saw in it two personages, one of whom said to him, indicating the other, "This is my Beloved Son." In the Wentworth letter the Prophet adds, speaking of the two, that they "exactly resembled each other in features, and likeness." 28 Notice they not just resembled-they exactly resembled each other in features and likeness. We speak of a family resemblance: "Like father, like son." The Son looked like his Father. Philip asked, "Show us the Father." The Master replied, "Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father." 29 This is not because they are identical but because they are, in appearance as well as in nature, exactly similar.

This circumstance may give further insight into the phrase Alma used in his familiar set of questions about our spiritual progress: "Is the image of God engraven upon your countenances?" 30 It may also give greater meaning to a favorite story of President David O. McKay's about the great stone face: in the very loving of a countenance one may eventually take on the character of what one loves. 31 It gives further confirmation of the Prophet's later vision of the Twelve while in Kirtland-a disparate group of men from a variety of backgrounds whom he saw in vision, through their flounderings and struggles, until he saw them glorified. He saw them welcomed by father Adam, ushered to the throne of God, greeted and embraced by the Master, and then crowned. "He saw that they all had beautiful heads of hair and all looked alike." 32 This should not be pushed to mean that the Twelve had absolutely similar features, but rather that in glory, "in bloom and beauty"-and the Prophet uses the word beauty to describe the glory of a resurrected man as well as of a woman-they were similar. 33

NOTE:

28 - See Backman, First Vision, p. 169.

29 - John 14:8-9.

30 - Alma 5:14, 19.

31 - In Conference Report, October 1926, p. 112; Gospel Ideals, p. 355.

32 - Recollection of Heber C. Kimball in Whitney, Life of Heber C. Kimball, p. 94; italics added.

33 - TPJS, p. 368; WJS, p. 369.

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise" John 5:19).

[JohnnyRudick]

It doesn't say they were identical there. Could you please direct me to where Joseph said they were identical in appearance?

I believe we get it from this verse;

Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners

spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son,

whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made

the worlds;

Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the

express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word

of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on

the right hand of the Majesty on high:

Hebrews 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he

hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Bro. Rudick

[WillowTheWhisp]

32 This should not be pushed to mean that the Twelve had absolutely similar features, but rather that in glory, "in bloom and beauty"-and the Prophet uses the word beauty to describe the glory of a resurrected man as well as of a woman-they were similar.

That's the kind of thing I mean though. Surely we can't all end up being identical in the afterlife - or even Jesus and Heavenly Father being identical. That would be too confusing. The Prophet says that all the Twelve looked the same but we are told that we are not to take that to mean they were identical. If we are to 'receive his image in oiur countenance' it doesn't mean we ae going to end up looking like him and lose our own identity does it?

[Ceebooboo]

What is it about the idea of an actual physical conception of Jesus that really bothers us?

Hello Just_A_Guy, :)

I think you were speaking of other LDS when you say " what bothers us " ?? No ??

I have been enjoying this site for several months and had never heard of this teaching. ( while reading this thread, I am still not sure if it is or is not a teaching of LDS )

To me, this idea of Almighty God having physical relations with Mary is beyond obsurd and indeed is one of the " WAY OUT " things I have heard, to date, from my LDS friends.

I have also noted that a previous post indicated that the King Follet Sermon has some teachings regarding this. I have read the King Follet Sermon, and although it teaches things that I simply can not reason, it says nothing about Mary and God having relations.

I must say, this thread has confused my already confused mind of the LDS teachings.

Peace,

Ceebooboo

[Just_A_Guy]

Hey Ceeboo(boo)

Hello Just_A_Guy, :)

I think you were speaking of other LDS when you say " what bothers us " ?? No ??

Well, "us" in the sense of "we, here, in this discussion, regardless of religion". :)

I have been enjoying this site for several months and had never heard of this teaching. ( while reading this thread, I am still not sure if it is or is not a teaching of LDS )

It's not technically a Church teaching; it's just something that Brigham Young said and that some Church members (including some rather influential ones) have believed over the years; and that the rest of us enjoy debating periodically.

I have also noted that a previous post indicated that the King Follet Sermon has some teachings regarding this. I have read the King Follet Sermon, and although it teaches things that I simply can not reason, it says nothing about Mary and God having relations.

I don't recall the King Follett sermon saying that, either. I'll have to read through the thread again and think about the post you mention.

EDIT: Just did a search. The only other reference to "King" I can find in this thread is Alana's quote from Ezra Taft Benson, which in passing cites King Benjamin (in the Book of Mormon) as referring generically to the condescension of God.

Edited March 26, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[JohnnyRudick]

I greatly dislike the idea that God the Father had relations with the Virgin Mary . . .

1) Immortal parents produce spirit children - Doctrines of Salvation, volume 2, p. 68

2) There is no evidence that an immortal sperm and a mortal egg could combine. It defies logic. We can't even stand in gods full presence without being transfigured. Elohims sperm would have anhiliated Mary's egg.

3) Mary and Joseph are Married. Elohim is not some galavanting greek God.

4) If Jesus was a hybrid, which he was not. What would have happened if he had had children. (I dont think he had physical relations with any mortals during his mortal ministry btw) Would they have been 1/4 immortal?

5) If God were to sin he would cease to be God. Alma 42.

"1) Immortal parents produce spirit children - Doctrines of Salvation, volume 2, p. 68"

No problem there is there? If so, where?

"2) There is no evidence that an immortal sperm and a mortal egg could combine. It defies logic. We can't even stand in gods full presence without being transfigured. Elohims sperm would have anhiliated Mary's egg."

That is why the "power of the Holy Ghost" had to over shadow her.

Do you believe Scripture?

Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise:

When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came

together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Matthew 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the

angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph,

thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for

that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

Luke 1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent

from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,

Luke 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph,

of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.

Luke 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou

that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou

among women.

Luke 1:29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying,

and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.

Luke 1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou

hast found favour with God.

Luke 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and

bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.

Luke 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the

Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his

father David:

Luke 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever;

and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Luke 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be,

seeing I know not a man?

Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy

Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall

overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be

born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

"3) Mary and Joseph are Married. Elohim is not some galavanting greek God. "

I agree.

"4) If Jesus was a hybrid, which he was not."

He is not?

That is what made the Atonement possible.

Up to that time priests legitimate and otherwise have been trying to bridge the gap between God and man.

To bring man back to the presence of God.

To make the ultimate sacrifice.

God has given us types and figures throughout the Scriptures pointing to the day in the meridian of time when this would finally be accomplished.

Jesus in His humanity that he inherited from His mother was able to lay down His life.

Through the Godhood of His Father He was able to lay down His life voluntarily and take it up again Himself.

No other man could have done it.

If a fallen angel had been able to pull off a hybred, (and I personally think they may have) the off spring would not have wanted to do it and I believe it would not have had the power to take it's life up again anyway.

"What would have happened if he had had children."

Maybe He did. Who knows?

"(I dont think he had physical relations with any mortals during his mortal ministry"

Maybe not. Who knows?

"btw) Would they have been 1/4 immortal?"

Yup.

"5) If God were to sin he would cease to be God. Alma 42."

No, Scripture ever said He did sin so no problem.

He is still God.

Bro. Rudick

[Ceebooboo]

Hi again Just_A_Guy :) ( Loved the " hey Ceeboo(boo) you offered )

Thanks for the reply.

I can't help but suggest ( no contention desired ): How can something as important of Jesus The Christ's birth NOT have an official teaching from the LDS??

Simply do not get the " maybe " and the " debatable " labels considering the MONUMENTAL TOPIC.

Thanks again for the sharing :)

Peace,

Ceebooboo