Was Jesus "Sired" via Artificial Insemination?

[_Trinity]

You guys and your dirty little minds are disgusting. You will have to answer to Heavenly Father on this. You should be more respectful about things you simply have not a hope of understanding.

Oh c'mon, Charity.

The idea that that God of the universe had to have had physical sex anyway is a little disconcerting.

Couldn't God just think it, and Mary would be pregnant?

I mean, if He could say "Let there be light", and the whole universe filled with light, surely a simple thing as a human pregnancy would be as simple as "You're pregnant."

(OK, ladies, not that I'm saying pregnancy is a simple thing .... I have two kids, and I know from watching their mother it was anything but simple ...)

But, we're talking GOD here.

This discussion is a natural reaction from the Mormon humanization of God. God said "multiply and replenish" and further extended that directive to the Mormons when declaring that your children are your glory and will be a prime duty in the hereafters. I really doubt any other christian sect has such an obsession about sex. They haven't made eternal increase the ultimate goal.

[_ozemc]

You guys and your dirty little minds are disgusting. You will have to answer to Heavenly Father on this. You should be more respectful about things you simply have not a hope of understanding.

Oh c'mon, Charity.

The idea that that God of the universe had to have had physical sex anyway is a little disconcerting.

Couldn't God just think it, and Mary would be pregnant?

I mean, if He could say "Let there be light", and the whole universe filled with light, surely a simple thing as a human pregnancy would be as simple as "You're pregnant."

(OK, ladies, not that I'm saying pregnancy is a simple thing .... I have two kids, and I know from watching their mother it was anything but simple ...)

But, we're talking GOD here.

This discussion is a natural reaction from the Mormon humanization of God. God said "multiply and replenish" and further extended that directive to the Mormons when declaring that your children are your glory and will be a prime duty in the hereafters. I really doubt any other christian sect has such an obsession about sex. They haven't made eternal increase the ultimate goal.

Well, I do know in my church, we don't talk a lot about it, but we sure do seem to have a lot of babies!

[_truth dancer]

Once again, we have prophets teach and reveal the "truth" that God and Mary had sex resulting in the birth of Jesus, and yet modern apologists know better.

Prophets did not know what they were talking about, thought they were receiving revelation and inspiration but were just plain wrong. Look to today's apologists for the answers.

:-(

The idea that God and Mary had sex, NEVER worked for me. First the idea that God is a man makes me dizzy. I seriously can't fit it into my brain as any sort of reality.

As if God's DNA is like the human at this moment in history, knowing that our DNA is a direct result of our ancestors interacting with a very specific environment.

Anyway... even as a believer nothing made sense about this teaching which as we all know was certainly taught as doctrine, and is still taught and believed today.

It is, like many other doctrines, no longer really discussed; moved into the "I don't know that we teach that, we do not know much about that," catagory, and never officially addressed. Members are left to go with whatever they want.

Which is fine but it is disingenuous to suggest that sex between God and Mary was not doctrine in the LDS church.

~dancer~

[_Sethbag]

If God and Mary did "do it" in the traditional sense, do you think Mary had an orgasm?

How could she not? I mean, he was a real God in bed, you know.

[_Sethbag]

Abman, just to clarify, stem cells are not like sperm cells. Stem cells still have the full complement of DNA, whereas sperm cells only have half, and require joining with the DNA contained in an egg cell in order to have the full human DNA count. So creating stem cells isn't the same thing.

I suppose you could argue this further and just say God is a few inventions ahead of humans on this one, but that's just silly IMHO.

At some point, it becomes kind of humorously pointless to argue that Elohim, the God of this entire universe of billions of galaxies each containing billions of stars, came down to this one planet, Earth, and took a cotton swab and rubbed it on the inside of his mouth, handed it over to one of his lab techs, who took some individual cells, omnisciently decided how to split the DNA in half to provide just the right Saviorly DNA combo, and then created a viable germ cell out of it, and then went down, chloroformed Mary so that she'd be unconscious, and caused this artificial-yet-derived-from-God's-cheek germ cell to be inserted into her uterus through a tiny incision in her belly button, making sure that nothing passed the sacred hymen of the virgin Mary (which of course would have rendered the whole practice unholy and impure).

[_asbestosman]

Abman, just to clarify, stem cells are not like sperm cells. Stem cells still have the full complement of DNA, whereas sperm cells only have half, and require joining with the DNA contained in an egg cell in order to have the full human DNA count. So creating stem cells isn't the same thing.

Sorry for not being clear, but yes I realize that. I had read that viable sperm cells and egg cells had been created from stem cells--in mice anyhow. I recommend reading the book The Dude recommended to me, Challenging Nature. It's a great book

.

At some point, it becomes kind of humorously pointless to argue that Elohim, the God of this entire universe of billions of galaxies each containing billions of stars, came down to this one planet, Earth, and took a cotton swab and rubbed it on the inside of his mouth, handed it over to one of his lab techs, who took some individual cells, omnisciently decided how to split the DNA in half to provide just the right Saviorly DNA combo, and then created a viable germ cell out of it, and then went down, chloroformed Mary so that she'd be unconscious, and caused this artificial-yet-derived-from-God's-cheek germ cell to be inserted into her uterus through a tiny incision in her belly button, making sure that nothing passed the sacred hymen of the virgin Mary (which of course would have rendered the whole practice unholy and impure).

I agree that it's pointless. In fact, the pointlessness of the thing has been my whole point in this thread. That said, I don't think Dr. Peterson is arguing that. He is merely arguing that God could impregnate Mary with His DNA without intercourse. Again, I don't care if He in fact did resort to intercourse. It really doesn't matter to me.

[_Imwashingmypirate]

If God and Mary did "do it" in the traditional sense, do you think Mary had an orgasm?

How could she not? I mean, he was a real God in bed, you know.

She would have had all the orgasms in the world and in the heavens put together. that's why she forgot, she was so blown away. And she screamed so loud that Joseph thought he saw a vision but really it was the power of the orgasm. All the windows smashed and everyone became blinded for that period of time that they believed Mary was still a virgin. And that is why the midwife's hand burnt when seeing if Mary was a virgin because it was so increadible that Mary was internally on fire. I think this is verging on pornographic. XD

[_Sethbag]

Abman, just to clarify, stem cells are not like sperm cells. Stem cells still have the full complement of DNA, whereas sperm cells only have half, and require joining with the DNA contained in an egg cell in order to have the full human DNA count. So creating stem cells isn't the same thing.

Sorry for not being clear, but yes I realize that. I had read that viable sperm cells and egg cells had been created from stem cells--in mice anyhow. I recommend reading the book The Dude recommended to me, Challenging Nature. It's a great book.

Oh yeah, you've brought this up before, and I keep thinking yeah I'll pick up that book, and I keep forgetting. Ok, I just went and added it to my Amazon wishlist so I won't forget it. Thanks for bringing that up again. I'd like to read the book.

[_Mister Scratch]

I agree that it's pointless. In fact, the pointlessness of the thing has been my whole point in this thread. That said, I don't think Dr. Peterson is arguing that. He is merely arguing that God could impregnate Mary with His DNA without intercourse.

Yes, He *could*, but that's not what the Brethren of yesteryear taught us.

Again, I don't care if He in fact did resort to intercourse. It really doesn't matter to me.

I must say, the "Uh, well, God probably knows much more & etc." type of apologetic response has to be about the lamest of all of them. What is the point of having doctrine at all if it fails to tell us anything?

[_asbestosman]

Oh yeah, you've brought this up before, and I keep thinking yeah I'll pick up that book, and I keep forgetting. Ok, I just went and added it to my Amazon wishlist so I won't forget it. Thanks for bringing that up again. I'd like to read the book.

You might wanna check it out in the local library too. Mine has saved me oodles of moolah on book expenses not to mention storage space. Of course, The Dude and I have a great library system where we live. While the book's premise seems to largely be a circumstantial case against the coherence of the idea of a soul, it was a real page-turner for me. It's not really an atheism book like Dawkins' book is, but I think it hits a bit closer to home for me because it is less directly antagonistic to religion and relies much more on scientific findings than on philosophical argumentation/sophistry.