bcspace wrote:Do you have a doctrinal statement? Frankly, I think it likely you are reading more detail into what is there.
See:
http://www.carm.org/LDS/virginmary.htm You'll note that I am indeed NOT reading anything more into it than is actually there.
Incredibly weak Shades. A CARM site!? lol
You mean that the following statements quoted there were not actually made by the prophets and apostles quoted?
If so, CFR on that.
Brigham Young, second prophet and president of the LDS church said,
"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, v. 8, p. 115).
Brigham Young also said, "Now, remember from this time forth, and for ever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, page 51).
Brigham Young said, "When the time came that His first-born, the Saviour, should come into the world and take a tabernacle, the Father came Himself and favoured that spirit with a tabernacle instead of letting any other man do it. The Saviour was begotten by the Father of His spirit, by the same Being who is the Father of our spirits." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, page 218, 1857.)
Joseph Fielding Smith, stated:
"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, p. 44) as cited in the book, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality, by Gerald and Sandra Tanner, Utah Lighthouse Ministry, P.O. Box 1854, Sal Lake City, Utah 84110, Bookstore at 1350 South West Temple. 1982, page 260).
Joseph Fielding Smith said, "They tell us the Book of Mormon states that Jesus was begotten of the Holy Ghost. I challenge that statement. The Book of Mormon teaches no such thing! Neither does the Bible." (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1, page 19)
Bruce McConkie, who was a member of the First Council of the Seventy stated,
"Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers," (Mormon Doctrine, 1966, page 547.)
"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,...Christ is the Son of Man, meaning that his Father (the Eternal God!) is a Holy Man." (Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce McConkie, page 742.)
Heber C. Kimball who was a member of the first presidency said,
"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 saviour 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, v. 8, p. 211)
"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" (Deseret News, October 10, 1866) as cited in the book, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality, by Gerald and Sandra Tanner, Utah Lighthouse Ministry, P.O. Box 1854, Sal Lake City, Utah 84110, Bookstore at 1350 South West Temple. 1982, page 261.
It seems to me that any devout LDS reading this material would be amply justified in concluding that Jesus's 'begetting' by a deity (who were a told is 'a Holy Man') occurred through normal intercourse.
You may wish to deny that this idea is 'doctrine' - given a tight enough definition, that is no doubt possible. But to deny that the notion of the physical paternity of Jesus by the LDS deity was not widely taught and hence probably widely believed in the CoJCoLDS at certain times seems to demand an amount of mental agility that seems perverse.
Since your deity has a body of flesh and bones like you and me, he has a penis and testicles, and those testicles produce spermatozoa that carry his DNA. No?
Given that, why are you so reluctant to believe that when he begets children he uses the relevant organs the way you and I do?