God Having Sex with Mary

[_truth dancer]

Hi EE...

Clearly from your perspective, we primates therefore, owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to the reptiles for the almighty gift of sexuality, which their primitive mating acts, via evolutionary science, did so nobly bestow.

ABSOLUTELY! I totally honor and celebrate those life forms who preceeded us and invented so many "miraculous" aspects of life, we as humans utilize. I very humbly acknowledge the four billion year history of life that has brought us to this point, and hold in my heart the knowledge that without them we would not exist.

In fact, I stand in awe at the creations that have come forth bringing us everything from a spinal cord, to eyes, to emotions.

Yes, we owe a tremendous debt of gratitude.

~dancer~

[_Roger Morrison]

Hi Folks, am i to take from all this postulating that there is agreement on the "Virgin birth"? The question is "HOW?" I suppose one can speculate "how" without believing it "is"??? But "why" i wonder???

[_ajax18]

When I first heard that several Church prophets honestly believed that God came to earth and had sex with Mary, I was horrified.

And yet, this concept didn't seem to bother my husband at all.

Why is there such a different mindset on this among many TBM's?

If you don't accept the Bible, than I don't see the point in debating whether God had sex with Mary or not since it would all be myth. I find harmony and Truth Dancers ideas about God being something we couldn't imagine interesting and for all I know possible, but definitely not Biblical.

"God overpowering Mary," I really don't think that is how it happened. I don't think of God as a rapist. Perhaps that's why modern prophets were careful to point out that in the eternities Mary would be sealed to God the Father, and was married to Joseph for time.

While email has been shown to be a superior way of communication, I don't see artificial insemination as being superior to sex. It also fits with Mormon doctrine that we believe in procreation through sexual reproduction, not artificial insemination. Again, if you don't accept these doctrines than I'm sure it's all wide open and pointless to debate anyway.

Yes Liz the feminist ideal is probably some sexless form of reproduction where female red type personalities are able to maintain complete and absolute power and overcome our evolutionary past. You wouldn't be from an island off the coast of British Colombia would you?

[_harmony]

Hi Folks, am i to take from all this postulating that there is agreement on the "Virgin birth"? The question is "HOW?" I suppose one can speculate "how" without believing it "is"??? But "why" i wonder???

How? is easier to discuss than Why?

[_harmony]

When I first heard that several Church prophets honestly believed that God came to earth and had sex with Mary, I was horrified.

And yet, this concept didn't seem to bother my husband at all.

Why is there such a different mindset on this among many TBM's?

If you don't accept the Bible, than I don't see the point in debating whether God had sex with Mary or not since it would all be myth.

Why? Surely you know the provence of the Bible.

I find harmony and Truth Dancers ideas about God being something we couldn't imagine interesting and for all I know possible, but definitely not Biblical.

And yet Mormons don't hold the Bible to be inerrant. Why do you? And why is the Bible the last word on this issue?

"God overpowering Mary," I really don't think that is how it happened. I don't think of God as a rapist. Perhaps that's why modern prophets were careful to point out that in the eternities Mary would be sealed to God the Father, and was married to Joseph for time.

So you're saying God the Father had sex with a woman who was not his wife? Are you sure you want to go there?

And what evidence do you have that shows that Joseph was married to Mary for time only? They had several more children; who are those children sealed to?

While email has been shown to be a superior way of communication, I don't see artificial insemination as being superior to sex.

This, from a man. Do you feel qualified then, to expound on Mary's experience?

It also fits with Mormon doctrine that we believe in procreation through sexual reproduction, not artificial insemination.

The LDS church does not currently do much thinking outside the box, ajax. Reproduction by God doesn't have to look like reproduction by man. And what makes you think the prophets got this one right, seeing as how their track record isn't exactly stellar on several other issues.

Again, if you don't accept these doctrines than I'm sure it's all wide open and pointless to debate anyway.

Yes Liz the feminist ideal is probably some sexless form of reproduction where female red type personalities are able to maintain complete and absolute power and overcome our evolutionary past. You wouldn't be from an island off the coast of British Colombia would you?

Unnecessary, and beneath you, ajax.

[_ajax18]

Genesis 1:26-27

God created man in his own image.

To me this is not indicative of some different kind of nonprimate lifeform. The entire LDS and arguably Judeo Christian afterlife is based on the family unit, a product of primate evolution. Therfore the belief that God is not in the image of man to me is not Biblical. That's how I read it and I think the prophets made a good case for it Biblically. How do you interpret this scripture?

[_ajax18]

The problem with the idea that God is a man, had sex with Mary, and created a half/man half/God person is that this assumes God is a rather primitive primate, like current humans. Gone is the mytery, majesty, grand, omnipotent, omnipresent divine essense, replaced with a human male with sexual needs, drives, desires.

I don't really see the idea that God has sexual desires as making Him a primitive primate. Again, LDS theology is based on the idea of man having the potential to become like God. This life is a time to see if we can bridle such passions. What would be the point of learning to conquer the natural man if we wouldn't have such challenges in eternity?

Just because God procreated with Mary through sexual reproduction doesn't necessarily mean He has sexual needs, drives, or desires. Perhaps resurrected bodies aren't afflicted in such ways. Just as God doesn't experience hunger, doesn't mean He can't eat. Maybe the only reason Jesus ate the fish and honeycomb was to show he could, not because he was hungry.

[_ajax18]

I don't think the Bible itself will completely answer whether or not Truth Dancers ideas about God are Biblical or not without making way more of it than is actually said. I doubt the ancients who wrote the Bible ever considered such questions.

It seems like there's a push to outlaw and disrespect being a man these days. Everything we've evolved to be seems to clash with modern life. I guess evolution didn't necessarily make men and women compatible in what there views of the ideal would be. Guess what, if it weren't for rape, none of us would even be here. Does that horrify you? Yet it's still true.

[_harmony]

I don't think the Bible itself will completely answer whether or not Truth Dancers ideas about God are Biblical or not without making way more of it than is actually said. I doubt the ancients who wrote the Bible ever considered such questions.

I doubt the ancients that wrote the Bible were over-worried about what people in 2006 would do with their words. And why should words written 6000-8000 years ago, about a sheepherder and his ancestors, carry more weight than modern logic and science?

Have you ever studied myth, ajax?

It seems like there's a push to outlaw and disrespect being a man these days.

On the contrary, man is just now reaching some of his best potential.

Everything we've evolved to be seems to clash with modern life.

Everything we've evolved from is not applicable to modern life. What we're from is not the issue; what's we're evolving to is what's important right now.

I guess evolution didn't necessarily make men and women compatible in what there views of the ideal would be.

Men are from Mars; Women are from Venus.

Guess what, if it weren't for rape, none of us would even be here. Does that horrify you? Yet it's still true.

I'm just sure you're going to explain this comment.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Ajax...

I don't think the Bible itself will completely answer whether or not Truth Dancers ideas about God are Biblical or not without making way more of it than is actually said. I doubt the ancients who wrote the Bible ever considered such questions.

Of course not. The Bible was created thousands of years ago by some tribal nomadic men dealing with a completely different world.

It seems like there's a push to outlaw and disrespect being a man these days.

I don't think I have presented my beliefs well... let me try again.


I completely respect and honor men. I find humankind to be the most amazing creatures to have ever existed in the known universe. I find our history to be beyond comprehension in a grand and sacred way. I find our abilities spectacular. I am completely filled with AWE at our existence. Please understand this point.

My belief in evolution MAGNIFIES my awe and wonder at our existence. I treasure our ancestry. The fact that we came from an exploding star truly fills my spirit with a wonder I can't describe. The fact that we came from animals gives me a sense of humility and gratitude that I can't articulate in words.

There is NOTHING at all in my belief that disrespects humankind generally or men particularly.

Evolution is only "disrespectful" if one goes with the idea that humans are the ultimate animal, far superior to our origins. I do not hold this view. I honor what has brought us here.

Everything we've evolved to be seems to clash with modern life.

Now this is an interesting point... What we have evolved to be came to existence because it worked in the past NOT because it is what we currently require. So yes, we have evolved in ways that are currently maladaptive. No question. The question is, will we adapt thereby allowing the continuation of our species or will we try to hold onto archaic ideas and die?

I guess evolution didn't necessarily make men and women compatible in what there views of the ideal would be.

The problem in this discussion is not the differences between men and women.... the problem is your inability to understand that humans at this moment in time are not the end all to creation. We are only about half way into the life of our universe... humans are very new on the scene. There is a LOT more to come. What I can't understand is how some people think evolution stops at this very moment in time. I truly don't get this idea.

Whatever the ideal is for whomever, it is a billion times less than what is certainly possible. Why limit God to our human earthly naïve minds and abilitites?

I'm quite certain there is no one who enjoys sex more than I, but I am equally certain we have yet to bring into the experience of humankind what is possible.

I'm frustrated becaues this point doesn't seem to be heard. It is NOT sex that is the problem... it is the idea that the God of the universe is not more advanced than us, new to the scene primates.

Guess what, if it weren't for rape, none of us would even be here. Does that horrify you? Yet it's still true

.

I'm not sure what this comment is about... basically everything that has ever happened would have had to occur to have this moment be as it is.... both the good and the not so good.

~dancer~