Mormon God's Penis

[_beastie]

Moniker,

I posted the details in a thread in the telestial forum. Suffice it to say that mainstream Xtianity was not only mocked but linked with satan.

[_wenglund]

For as many decades as the LDS temple ceremony mocked mainstream Xtianity's conception of a bodiless God, you'd think its members would have gotten a little clue about what mainstreams believe.

Wade, Christ was God, God was Christ, God is the Holy Ghost, as well. Yet, God in heaven does not have an earthly body and he has NO gender!

I'm not going to try to make sense of it for you, since it makes NO sense to me -- yet, I'm explaining the thoughts on it. God is genderless and has no body!

So, as you understand things, the mortal Christ, as God, had no earthly body and NO gender?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_beastie]

Wade,

It seems to me that rather than attempting to find out exactly what mainstream Xtians actually believe, you're trying to prove Mormonism's theological superiority.

However they figure out the trinity, mainstream Xtians do not believe God has a body.

THAT is the point of the difference, not whether or not the belief makes sense. Everyone familiar with Mormonism knows that Mormons disdain and even mock mainstream Xtian's conception of the godhead, so quit playing games. Of course someone who was never Mormon is going to be confused by the idea of God with a penis, procreating spirit babies throughout eternity.

[_Mister Scratch]

I'm wondering, my dear friend, Wade---what is your opinion on the siring of Jesus? Do you think that Heavenly Father used his penis for this?

[_beastie]

I'm wondering, my dear friend, Wade---what is your opinion on the siring of Jesus? Do you think that Heavenly Father used his penis for this?

That's exactly what I asked Will Schryver on the thread where he showed us a drawing of God's penis. He hasn't been back.

[_CaliforniaKid]

For as many decades as the LDS temple ceremony mocked mainstream Xtianity's conception of a bodiless God, you'd think its members would have gotten a little clue about what mainstreams believe.

Wade, Christ was God, God was Christ, God is the Holy Ghost, as well. Yet, God in heaven does not have an earthly body and he has NO gender!

I'm not going to try to make sense of it for you, since it makes NO sense to me -- yet, I'm explaining the thoughts on it. God is genderless and has no body!

So, as you understand things, the mortal Christ, as God, had no earthly body and NO gender?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Hi Wade,

Orthodox Christian doctrine affirms that Christ had two natures, one human and one divine, and that the two were united but not intermixed in any way. In the words of the Chalcedonian Confession,

"We confess that one and the same Christ, Lord, and only-begotten Son, is to be acknowledged in two natures without confusion, change, division, or separation. The distinction between natures was never abolished by their union, but rather the character proper to each of the two natures was preserved as they came together in one person (prosopon) and one hypostasis."

In other words, while the mortal Jesus can be said to have had a penis, there is also a sense in which his divinity is not entirely implicated in his humanity. In any case, I can assure you that mainstream Christians do not talk or even think about Jesus' penis. They do not think that he ever actually use it in any sexual way; he practiced his own teaching about being a "eunuch" for God (in a moral rather than literal sense). In other words, Jesus is affirmed to have had a human nature but also to have set a pattern of asceticism, or denial of the flesh.

-Chris

[Physics Guy]

I'm wondering, my dear friend, Wade---what is your opinion on the siring of Jesus? Do you think that Heavenly Father used his penis for this?

That's exactly what I asked Will Schryver on the thread where he showed us a drawing of God's penis. He hasn't been back.

These poor Mopologists are stuck between a rock and a hard place on this issue. (Yes, pun intended.) They want to continue insisting upon the doctrines surrounding God and Jesus' physicality (and masculinity), and yet they become prudes and Puritans when it comes to the issue of Christ's conception. What is the point, from a doctrinal and theological standpoint, for God to have genitals if he's not going to use them? Are they merely for decoration's sake?

[_KimberlyAnn]

Actually, this topic was triggered by Will Schryver's gloating about God having a penis, and offering an illustration of said penis. He was probably inspired by Kerry, who discusses this with the most enthusiasm.

Yes, I noticed that post, and it did prompt my thread. And, you're right, Mormons spent years mocking the Christian concept of God in the temple. I read your Telestial thread, and concur with what you wrote there. Thanks, Beastie.

KA

[_Nightingale]

CK:
"...I can assure you that mainstream Christians do not talk or even think about Jesus' penis. They do not think that he ever actually use it in any sexual way;..."

Yes. Thank you. That's it.

These are some of the ways that some Mormons have no idea how off-the-wall they seem to non-LDS Christians. Never in all my Bible studies, as I mentioned, did we ever stop to autopsy God, dissecting all the "parts and passions" and "humanizing" Him. Never even had a single thought in that direction, ever.

I know that a person or group that is fundy-anything can be sexually repressed. However, it is quite amazing to see the difference between LDS teachings about sexual "purity", their emphasis on chastity and their focus on "the [monogamous] family" and the way they delve into regions, like God's anatomy, where no other religious person goes (no pun intended, definitely). That is just quite strange to me. It even sounds blasphemous to my fundy-ears. In fact, why the heck is this thread not in telestial I wonder?

Kinda kidding but still...

Yeah, I know it's hilarious to people who don't believe in God that discussing his anatomy is scandalous to some religious people. But maybe you remember what it was like when you did believe?

It reminds me of when I was talking to a Mormon friend one time and he mentioned (for reasons I forget) that Jesus was naked on the cross. I had never heard of that or thought about it at least and I told him that it was unbelievable to me that he would think of Jesus' nakedness. He was quite surprised and looked at me funny. Yeah. I was more fundy than a TBM.

My cross to bear.

I've recovered a bit from that now. :)

[_Moniker]

Nightingale, that's so funny you mention this! I often find myself feeling awkward with some of the sexual talk on the boards. It seems -- ahem -- off to me, in some sense! I can't quite pinpoint why this is so! Especially at MAD! Yet, it is, I think, somehow linked with the sexuality of the religion and yet, the sexual repression of the religious! :)