? Jesus' Virgin Birth

[lattelady]

It is taught and accepted as truth in most Christian denominations that Jesus was born of a virgin (Mary), a miraculous conception through the Spirit of God. What is the LDS view on Jesus birth? Was He born of a virgin, as taught in the Bible? Or was He the product of a physical union with God the Father (Elohim)?

[Dr T]

I go with the former. :)

[rameumptom]

While some members speculate on how God impregnated Mary, the scriptures are rather clear on her being a virgin that God's seed was planted in her through the Holy Spirit. Sex was not required.

[Tarnished]

Truthfully, if we can now, as a unperfect society impregnate a woman through scientific means (example: invetro fertilization) then what makes you think that a perfect God could not do something likewise? I completely go with the virgin conception.

[beefche]

Luke 1:34-35

34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I aknow not a man?

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.

1 Nephi 11:13-19

13 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the great city of Jerusalem, and also other cities. And I beheld the city of Nazareth; and in the city of aNazareth I beheld a bvirgin, and she was exceedingly fair and white.

14 And it came to pass that I saw the aheavens open; and an angel came down and stood before me; and he said unto me: Nephi, what beholdest thou?

15 And I said unto him: A virgin, most beautiful and fair above all other virgins.

16 And he said unto me: Knowest thou the acondescension of God?

17 And I said unto him: I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things.

18 And he said unto me: Behold, the avirgin whom thou seest is the bmother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.

19 And it came to pass that I beheld that she was carried away in the Spirit; and after she had been carried away in the aSpirit for the space of a time the angel spake unto me, saying: Look!

20 And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a achild in her arms.

These are just a couple of scriptures that explains the birth of Christ. I think it's safe to say that we believe He was born of a virgin, Mary, by the power of God. We don't know the actual mechanics of it.

[ryanh]

I am not aware of any LDS doctrinal teachings that would even suggest physical relations. Quite the contrary.

Read for yourself from the Book of Mormon:

1Nephi11:13-20 (note verse 20, where it notes in the vision that post-childbirth, she is called a virgin.)

13 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the great city of Jerusalem, and also other cities. And I beheld the city of Nazareth; and in the city of Nazareth I beheld a virgin, and she was exceedingly fair and white.

14 And it came to pass that I saw the heavens open; and an angel came down and stood before me; and he said unto me: Nephi, what beholdest thou?

15 And I said unto him: A virgin, most beautiful and fair above all other virgins.

16 And he said unto me: Knowest thou the condescension of God?

17 And I said unto him: I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things.

18 And he said unto me: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.

19 And it came to pass that I beheld that she was carried away in the Spirit; and after she had been carried away in the Spirit for the space of a time the angel spake unto me, saying: Look!

20 And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms.

Alma7:10

10 And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.

[NeuroTypical]

You can't swing a dead cat in the "regrettable church leader opinions" room without hitting a dozen speculations on the matter. Some of them are worded quite forcefully as THE TRUTH, although to the best of my knowledge, they are not. Like others have said in this thread, ultimately, the scriptures tell us what we know about it, which is Mary was a Virgin, and the Holy Ghost came upon her, and the power of the Highest overshadowed her. No clue what that means, except for the "I know not a man" part.

LM

[lattelady]

The LDS church today teaches the virgin birth--are there members that still subscribe to the teachings of some of the former prophets that God the Father is the literal father of Jesus?

[Just_A_Guy]

Personally I don't "subscribe" to it; but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.

[Palerider]

The LDS church today teaches the virgin birth--are there members that still subscribe to the teachings of some of the former prophets that God the Father is the literal father of Jesus?

For someone who doesn't know much about the church you seem to know alot....

[winterstar]

The LDS church today teaches the virgin birth--are there members that still subscribe to the teachings of some of the former prophets that God the Father is the literal father of Jesus?

what's not "literal" about God being the Father through miraculous means?

[beefche]

The LDS church today teaches the virgin birth--are there members that still subscribe to the teachings of some of the former prophets that God the Father is the literal father of Jesus?

I'm really curious why you would ask this question. Of course there are members who believe different things. Some choose to follow one prophet or leader, while others like to follow something from their own thoughts/beliefs.

I think it's clear what the church teaches--what members choose to believe is their choice.

[bytebear]

God the Father is the literal father of Jesus, but Mary was still a virgin.

[jadams_4040]

It is taught and accepted as truth in most Christian denominations that Jesus was born of a virgin (Mary), a miraculous conception through the Spirit of God. What is the LDS view on Jesus birth? Was He born of a virgin, as taught in the Bible? Or was He the product of a physical union with God the Father (Elohim)?

We beleive what the Holy bible teaches.:)

[lattelady]

"For someone who doesn't know much about what our Church teaches, you sure seem to know alot"--

I'm not sure why you're saying that. What I know about the LDS church comes from living in Utah for 25 years. As you can imagine, as a non-member, I've heard about MANY differing teachings. As many differing teachings as I've encountered on this forum, 25 years has provided a great deal more...

Beefche, the reason I was asking that question was: it's interesting to hear what the majority of current LDS members believe on different doctrines. I have heard both teachings. As I've spent time in this forum, I've seen that current teaching trumps former teachings from former prophets. Now and then, I will run into people who choose to hang on to a former prophet's teaching. I just wondered what the common, most widely held belief was. I wasn't going to argue with you on what the most common belief was. I just wondered.

Edited September 22, 2009 by lattelady

[Palerider]

All these LDS friends quoted Brigham Young to you etc..

[lattelady]

Where have I quoted Brigham Young? Why are you questioning me? Do you realize that anyone can read books or the internet--books on LDS doctrine are not off limits to non-mombers. I've grown up around devout members all of my life and have very close LDS friends. I'm not speaking negatively about the Church. What is it that I'm doing that is bothering you?

[Generally_Me]

Latte,

I grew up in the church, and in Utah, but I didn't know that "the church" taught God had carnal relations with Mary until a few months ago when I accidentally cruised onto an anti-Mormon website. It was news to me.

So I think it's safe to say that, that particular teaching is no longer being taught mainstream, and only by those who want to use it for whatever goal they are using it for. Mainstream Mormons believe that Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus. Whomever of your friends that are believing otherwise probably have other differences of opinion (such as, maybe, interpretation of the BoM, and how J. Smith accomplished that. Off the top of my head.)

[lattelady]

An honest question: was this a thought from way back, like in the 1800's? Someone else mentioned Brigham Young's name--was he the prophet who spoke about it? Please: I'm not playing dumb, I know this concept about Elohim being the literal father of Jesus had a place at one time in church history. I just wanted to know when the thought originated and when the concept died down or was replaced. I'm slowly learning how progressive prophecy works in the LDS faith (I'm not saying I agree with it, but I think I'm understanding your beliefs about it--I'm not here to bash your faith!).

[Palerider]

Where have I quoted Brigham Young? Why are you questioning me? Do you realize that anyone can read books or the internet--books on LDS doctrine are not off limits to non-mombers. I've grown up around devout members all of my life and have very close LDS friends. I'm not speaking negatively about the Church. What is it that I'm doing that is bothering you?

Last time I looked....I can ask questions....why do you get all in a huff when someone asks????

[Maxel]

The LDS church today teaches the virgin birth--are there members that still subscribe to the teachings of some of the former prophets that God the Father is the literal father of Jesus?

I believe that God the Father is the literal, physical father of Christ, but that doesn't mean that the Father had intercourse with Mary.

I look at it more this way:

If the father has flesh and bones, then those flesh and bones are constructed by DNA (I think; there may be something of a higher level at work but for this exercise's sake, we'll assume it's DNA). A literal son would have the DNA of his parent's- at birth, 50% is from his mom and 50% is from his dad.

Christ received godly DNA from his Father and human DNA from his mother. Somehow, Mary got impregnated and the resultant embryo contained 50% Mary's DNA and 50% God the Father's.

How exactly this occurred is anyone's guess; however I'm of the opinion that it wasn't through traditional means.

[bmy-]

Ivf

[Bob_Blaylock]

The LDS church today teaches the virgin birth--are there members that still subscribe to the teachings of some of the former prophets that God the Father is the literal father of Jesus?

You seem to be arguing a false dichotomy.

It is doctrinally very clear—Mary was a virgin at the time she gave birth to Jesus, meaning that she had not, up to the point, engaged in sexual intercourse with anyone.

However, this does not mean that Jesus is not literally, biologically, the son of God; I think doctrine is fairly clear on the point that he is.

As “Tarnished” has pointed out, we—being far less powerful and advanced than God—have the capability to cause a woman to become pregnant, without her having to engage in sexual intercourse. When we do it, it's called “artificial insemination”. We mortals have this power; why wouldn't God?

[lattelady]

Bob, I wasn't really trying to argue a false dichotomy. FORMER doctrine seemed to indicate with clarity that it wasn't anything like "holy artificial insemination." It's this quote that I want to ask about :

"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, no, nor was he begotten by the Holy Ghost. He is the Son of the Eternal Father." (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, Reed A. Benson p.7)

But I read in the Bible and also in the Book of Mormon that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Ghost. So I'm confused by the conflicted teachings. If you don't believe that God had physical relations with Mary (and I'm getting that very strong impression from most posters), but you DO believe that God impregnated her miraculously...do you make a separation between which personage of the Godhead actually caused her to become pregnant? Was it God the Father or the Holy Spirit, is what I mean. I realize my question has morphed a bit from the original question; I'm trying to balance what you're saying with what scripture is saying.

[Dravin]

But I read in the Bible and also in the Book of Mormon that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Ghost.

10 And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.

This says he was conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, not that the Holy Ghost is the father of Christ so there isn't any contradiction with the quote you provide.

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.

Another way to look at it is that the baby Mary was pregnant with was of the Spirit (aka the Holy Ghost) and not the result of Mary engaging in premarital sex, keep in mind the purpose of the statement in the verse is to calm Joseph's fears that Mary had cheated on him (They were betrothed at this point unless I'm confusing my Bible History, a real possibility) and was carrying around another man's baby. Telling him that the child within her is of the Spirit, or of the Holy Ghost, is not a statement of paternity (Christ is the Holy Ghost's child) but a reassurance that whatever is happening concerning her being pregnant is of God not mischief. That said I can understand how you can read it as you do, it isn't unreasonable when taken by itself.

Was it God the Father or the Holy Spirit, is what I mean.

Think of it as God the Father's DNA (to use Maxel's terminology) that was placed there using the Holy Ghost, or in other words, through the power of the Holy Ghost. It need not be either/or as you propose.

Lets say my wife is having trouble conceiving. We go to a fertility clinic, I provide my share of the DNA before the conception to be screened (or what have you). Later the Doctor takes that and combining it with my wife's eggs places it in the womb. My wife is pregnant through the actions of the doctor (without his actions in this scenario, no pregnant wife), so one could say my wife conceived through the power of the doctor (or modern medicine), the child however is still mine. So its not an either or proposition, Heavenly Father can be the father and the Holy Ghost still be involved.

Edited September 23, 2009 by Dravin