Mormons and the conception of Jesus

  • Thread starter Thread starter dcana
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dcana

Guest
I was having a PM conversation with a Mormon a while ago and was trying to understand the Mormon teaching on the person of Christ. In the course of conversation, I asked, “…And He is God’s son physically because God the Father had sex with Mary?” I was taken aback by the response. I had thought that it was fairly common knowledge that this was a Mormon belief. This is the response I received:

“No. We do not believe that God had sex with Mary. Mary was a virgin at the birth of her Son, Jesus Christ. However, God arranged that conception, it was not through having physical, sexual coitus with Mary…and by simply asking the question you have set off a few of my ‘oh, boy, here we go…’ alarms.”

And then:

“Yes. This is a pretty standard anti-ploy, m’friend. One of those things that sets off a LOT of bells and whistle alarms–right up there with ‘Mormons believe that Jesus and Satan are brothers’ and calling Joseph Smith ‘Joe,’ It’s a dead giveaway that the speaker is a lot more interested in bashing than learning anything. Think Jack Chick…Eucharist and cannibalism, Mary and idol worship…you know the sort of thing I’m talking about here.”

Naturally, I apologized as I didn’t mean to offend the person.

But I have looked around and not been able to find the “true teaching” of the LDS church that this person was referring to. Maybe I haven’t looked hard enough. Could someone (Catholic/Mormon/whatever) point me in the right direction?

Looking back at her response, I should have asked how it was that God “arranged that conception.”

God Bless
 
I have heard that as well from many sources in the Mormon church. But here are some articles, from the LDS website about how they view Jesus’ birth and later family life with Mary and Joseph.

lds.org/liahona/1991/12/mary-his-mother?lang=eng

lds.org/ensign/1974/12/mary-and-joseph?lang=eng

It is interesting to point out, that the article says that after Jesus Mary did not remain a virgin and in fact Jesus had siblings. Also remember these articles come from a website for those interested in the Mormon faith.

However for actual quotes from Mormon teachings:
Jesus is the only person who had our heavenly father as the father of his body" (family home evening manual p.125-126 1972)

‘Christ was begotten by an immortal father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal father."(Mormon doctrine p.547)

“The birth of the savior was as natural as the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood—was begotten of his father, as were of our fathers.” (Journal of Discourses vol.8 p.115)

If none but gods will be permitted to multiply immortal children, it follows that each God must have one or more wives. God, the Father of our spirits, became the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh. "(Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, page 158)

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. (Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, 8:211)

Bruce R. McConkie taught, “And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the Son of God, and that designation means what it says” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 742).

And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family. 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, pages 50-51)

He [Brigham Young] said that our GOD was Father Adam He was the Father of the Savior Jesus Christ Our God was no more or less than ADAM. " (“Wilford Woodruff Journal,” Feb. 19,1854)

Christ was begotten of God. He was NOT born without the aid of man and that man was God!" (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1:18)

Hope this helps! 😃
 
The two links are from the “Ensign” magazine. Does the “Ensign” teach official Mormon doctrine? If not, where can I find such a site?

I read through the first link and did not find any reference to the manner in which Jesus was conceived.

I found this reference to the LDS scriptures from the second link, which supports the correct understanding, as it is an almost direct quote from Scripture:

“And behold, he shall be born of Mary…who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.” (Alma 7:10)

As far as the quotes you give from “Mormon teachings,” however, they seem to all say the same thing. Namely, that God the Father had sex with Mary in order to conceive Jesus. It is interesting to note that none of them use the word “sex” or “intercourse” but they all necessarily imply it by saying that Jesus was conceived in the same manner as any other son.

So … which understanding is correct? Is it Alma 7:10 or the teachings that you listed? If the “official” teaching is as given by the quotes, then how do Mormons interpret 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.” (KJV) ? Why did the Holy Ghost “come upon” and “overshadow” Mary?

Can anybody shed light on this?

I have run across the phrase “the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh” multiple times. What exactly does this mean?

Pax
 
Ok, see this is why I was confused growing up as well. The Ensign is a magazine that the LDS church does put out, however I have noticed that the teachings are watered down a bit. Typically the Ensign can be used by the missionaries when they go door to door so that would explain the watered down part. Now the quotes are from various publications and talks that the Prophets and Apostles of the LDS church have written throughout the history of the LDS church. I have asked my mother about these teachings and her answer is that a Mormon who goes to the Temple will receive that knowledge, but it is only for those who are worthy enough to go to the temple, not the everyday people.
 
Simply put, God the Father was the literal father of Jesus Christ. The genetic material that resulted in the conception of Jesus came from two sources - half was from Mary and half was from God the Father. Jesus Christ was conceived within Mary through the power of the Holy Ghost. Mary was a virgin, and Jesus Christ was born as a result of a virgin birth.

Exactly how Mary’s pregnancy occured is not known, but we do know that not all pregnancies are a result of sex. If man can figure out how to cause a pregnancy without sex, God certainly can too.
Mary’s pregnancy was just like everyone else’s in that she went through nine months of gestation and gave birth in a natural manner.
40.png
dcana:
…then how do Mormons interpret 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.” (KJV) ? Why did the Holy Ghost “come upon” and “overshadow” Mary?
Click to expand...
We don’t claim to know specifics about “why” the Holy Ghost came upon her and overshadowed Mary, all we know is that it was part of the process that resulted in the conception of Christ.
What do you think it means for the “Holy Ghost to come upon thee”? or “the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee”? We do not claim any specific details on those phrases, but only that as a result Jesus Christ was conceived, and God the Father is the literal parent of Jesus.
 
Hmm … so there are secret, hidden teachings that only some privileged few can know? Sounds pretty gnostic to me. There is another group that has “hidden teachings,” in their case, about "Thetans, Xena, and a ‘Galactic Confederacy,’ to name but a few.

Did this person not tell me the truth?

Any Mormons out there?
 
flyonthewall said:
Simply put, God the Father was the literal father of Jesus Christ. The genetic material that resulted in the conception of Jesus came from two sources - half was from Mary and half was from God the Father. Jesus Christ was conceived within Mary through the power of the Holy Ghost. Mary was a virgin, and Jesus Christ was born as a result of a virgin birth.

Exactly how Mary’s pregnancy occured is not known, but we do know that not all pregnancies are a result of sex. If man can figure out how to cause a pregnancy without sex, God certainly can too.
Mary’s pregnancy was just like everyone else’s in that she went through nine months of gestation and gave birth in a natural manner.

We don’t claim to know specifics about “why” the Holy Ghost came upon her and overshadowed Mary, all we know is that it was part of the process that resulted in the conception of Christ.
What do you think it means for the “Holy Ghost to come upon thee”? or "the power of the Highest shall “overshadow thee”? We do not claim any specific details on those phrases, but only that as a result Jesus Christ was conceived, and God the Father is the literal parent of Jesus.
Click to expand...
And yet the quote from “Mormon Doctrine” says that “he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events” and Heber C. Kimball says “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.”

Oops. I noticed that some of the quotes talk about Jesus’ **birth **only. Mea culpa. Such as “The birth of the savior was as natural as the births of our children; it was the result of natural action” from the Journal of Discourses. Still, this is confusing. Why is it necessary to assert that “the birth of Jesus was as natural as the births of our children”? “To be born” means to travel from the inside to the outside of the womb, if I remember my biology correctly 🙂 What would an “unnatural” birth be? Unless they are asserting that Mary was not *physically *a virgin after as well as before her son’s birth, without getting into anatomical details, as we believe she was. Which is fine to assert.
 
dcana said:
And yet the quote from “Mormon Doctrine” says that “he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events.”
Click to expand...
Dcana,
It is also the “normal and natural course of events” that people have opinions–even Bruce R McConkie. Since he wasn’t quoting scripture, and wasn’t given an assignment to write the book he wrote–nor was the book reviewed by the apostles for publication–it was his opinions he was writing and they are only doctrinal when he was quoting scripture.

Since his statement is directly in conflict with scripture, and the pregnancy of Mary was not a “natural course of events” situation by any means (we all know that), then his words should not be taken as anything other than a non-doctrinal opinion that is neither here nor there.🤷
 
dcana said:
Hmm … so there are secret, hidden teachings that only some privileged few can know? Sounds pretty gnostic to me. There is another group that has “hidden teachings,” in their case, about "Thetans, Xena, and a ‘Galactic Confederacy,’ to name but a few.

Did this person not tell me the truth?

Any Mormons out there?
Click to expand...
Secret teachings? What are you smoking?

You’ve been told fairly clearly that scripture doesn’t tell us how the Holy Ghost arranged for the conception.
Or to put this in ‘Catholic Speak’ IT"S A MYSTERY!
Doesn’t that also jive with the extent of Catholic teaching on the conception?
 
dcana said:
And yet the quote from “Mormon Doctrine” says that “he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events.”
Click to expand...
If you look at the whole picture, you would come away with a different understanding of the author’s perspective:
en.fairmormon.org/Jesus_Christ/Conception
Bruce R. McConkie said this about the birth of Christ:
Click to expand...
God the Father is a perfected, glorified, holy Man, an immortal Personage. And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the Son of God, and that designation means what it says.[4]
In the same volume, Elder McConkie explained his reason for his emphasis:
Click to expand...
"Our Lord is the only mortal person ever born to a virgin, because he is the only person who ever had an immortal Father. Mary, his mother, “was carried away in the Spirit” (1 Ne. 11:13-21), was “overshadowed” by the Holy Ghost, and the conception which took place “by the power of the Holy Ghost” resulted in the bringing forth of the literal and personal Son of God the Father. (Alma 7:10; 2 Ne. 17:14; Isa. 7:14; Matt. 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-38.) Christ is not the Son of the Holy Ghost, but of the Father. (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, pp. 18-20.) Modernistic teachings denying the virgin birth are utterly and completely apostate and false.[5]
Note that McConkie emphasized the literal nature of Christ’s divinity, his direct descent from the Father, and the fact that the Holy Ghost was a tool, but not the source of Jesus’ divine Parenthood.
Click to expand...
40.png
dcana:
Oops. I noticed that some of the quotes talk about Jesus’ birth only. Mea culpa. Such as “The birth of the savior was as natural as the births of our children; it was the result of natural action” from the Journal of Discourses. Still, this is confusing. Why is it necessary to assert that “the birth of Jesus was as natural as the births of our children”? “To be born” means to travel from the inside to the outside of the womb, if I remember my biology correctly What would an “unnatural” birth be? Unless they are asserting that Mary was not physically a virgin after as well as before her son’s birth, without getting into anatomical details, as we believe she was. Which is fine to assert.
Click to expand...
I would say it is to emphasize that Jesus was indeed as one of us. His condecsencion was complete. His start in this life was no different than anyone else, and that He overcame everything we could be faced with.
 
ParkerD said:
Dcana,
It is also the “normal and natural course of events” that people have opinions–even Bruce R McConkie. Since he wasn’t quoting scripture, and wasn’t given an assignment to write the book he wrote–nor was the book reviewed by the apostles for publication–it was his opinions he was writing and they are only doctrinal when he was quoting scripture.

Since his statement is directly in conflict with scripture, and the pregnancy of Mary was not a “natural course of events” situation by any means (we all know that), then his words should not be taken as anything other than a non-doctrinal opinion that is neither here nor there.🤷
Click to expand...
OK, makes sense to me. Can you point me to some website that has the Official Mormon Teaching that Jesus was conceived in Mary’s womb in a non-physical way by the Holy Spirit?

Thank you
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top