What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is Jesus genetically related to Mary?

miamited said:
Hi jeremiah1five

I'm not sure why you're preaching that message. I don't have any question on that. But yes, because God can create something such as DNA, RNA, muscle, bone or tendon from nothing. He can also do the same thing to bring forth His Son's human body.

And yet you call out the same argument. You want to equate being 'human' as only being someone who must have someone's previously existing DNA.

I honestly don't think you understand my questions here. Thanks for your response.

You were there and that's your eyewitness account or you have some other evidence to back that up? We don't know 'how' the Holy Spirit accomplished the task of making Mary pregnant with child. 'called forth the right egg'? Really??? You've got a theological treatise that supports that as truth? Do you believe that it would have been impossible for God to have implanted Mary, through the Holy Spirit, with a fully formed and functioning zygote?

God bless,
Ted
Click to expand...
As Al Einstein said, "God doesn't play dice with the cosmos."
In other words, God leaves nothing to chance. It wasn't chance that the egg from Mary was a naturally expelled egg from her body. It was ordained just as she was ordained to be the vessel from which Israel's Promised Messiah and Redeemer would be born. God ordained the color of his eyes and hair, His height, His complexion, and so forth.
It is even reasonable to think that the Christophanies of the Logos (the Angel of the LORD) appeared to Abraham in appearance the same as Jesus Christ would be born. The same 'likeness.' Maybe the same Person. How's that for miracle?
God leaves nothing to chance.
 
eddif said:
Adam and Eve became living souls. That is a very good creation, but they did not know the difference between good and evil.
Click to expand...
I can agree with that. However, the word "good" does not mean 'morally' good. It means "good" [enough] or "to specification, like God saying to Himself (and He did) that creation was to His 'specification' and a job well done.
I also agree they didn't know evil however they were created sinful/evil. All the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil did was give them the KNOWLEDGE of their creation. Until God said "Thou shalt not" in the Garden they knew only "good" (and I put that in quotation marks) because they had not yet known evil/sin until the commandment came and as Paul said in Romans 7 "sin revived and it slew me."
eddif said:
The spiritual gifts of 1 Corinthians 12 were not in them. They had the breath of life in them from Spirit the Holy, but they did not have the Holy Spirit in themselves.
Click to expand...
I agree.
eddif said:
Satan/serpent wanted them to know good and evil. Not the difference between good and evil, but break the (not eat) commandment and become sinful.
Click to expand...
It was God that wanted to show His creation that He was sinful. The existence of the Law/Command of "Thou shalt not" as Paul says again in Romans shows us that we are sinners before we sin. If there is no law or command against spitting on the sidewalk that doesn't mean I don't know how to spit. But when the Law/Command comes that says "Don't spit on the sidewalk" spitting is in my ability to do whether or not I do it (spit.)
They didn't "become" sinful. They were already sinful for that is how God created them. They were not created holy for holiness is the Nature of God and God does not reduplicate His Nature in man for the simple fact being that He just doesn't do it. If God reduplicated His Nature of Holy in man, then God would have to reduplicate ALL His Nature and Attributes else man would fall short of God's glory. There is ONLY ONE Person who can stand before a Holy God and that is a Holy Son. Man was created fallen short of the glory of God and the Greek word for that is "harmatia" which means, "missing the mark."
What is the "mark" that was missed?
The glory of God.
eddif said:
It is all the way to Pentecost before sons and daughters had the new man birth.
Mississippi redneck
eddif
Click to expand...
But those saints and Christians in the Old Testament that looked forward in faith to God fulfilling His Promise of Redemption. For before "faith came, we [they] were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed" (Gal. 3:23) and that revelation was the Advent of the Promised Holy Spirit.
 
jeremiah1five said:
As Al Einstein said, "God doesn't play dice with the cosmos."
In other words, God leaves nothing to chance. It wasn't chance that the egg from Mary was a naturally expelled egg from her body. It was ordained just as she was ordained to be the vessel from which Israel's Promised Messiah and Redeemer would be born. God ordained the color of his eyes and hair, His height, His complexion, and so forth.
It is even reasonable to think that the Christophanies of the Logos (the Angel of the LORD) appeared to Abraham in appearance the same as Jesus Christ would be born. The same 'likeness.' Maybe the same Person. How's that for miracle?
God leaves nothing to chance.
Click to expand...
Hi jeremiah1five

While I don't deny any of that, I don't really see the relevance to the question this thread presents. Did Jesus have any living person's previous DNA in the formation of his earthly body? I don't have a problem with believing any of the miracles that God reveals to us in His Scriptures. I mean, I'm even one who believes that some 6,000 years ago there wasn't a single heavenly body in all of the existing universe that we see with our eyes today. I have no problem believing that the sun literally stood in place in the sky over Jerusalem for nearly an entire day. I'm down with all of the miracles of God, which is why I'm asking the question.

God bless,
Ted
 
miamited said:
Hi jeremiah1five

While I don't deny any of that, I don't really see the relevance to the question this thread presents. Did Jesus have any living person's previous DNA in the formation of his earthly body?
Click to expand...
Let's look at the facts.
Each human cell contains 23 pairs of chromosomes that carry DNA within their nucleus. The X and Y chromosomes, commonly referred to as the sex chromosomes, are one such pair. They determine the biological sex, reproductive organs, and sexual characteristics that develop in a person. Female (XX) mammals inherit one X chromosome from each parent, but males (XY) receive an X from their mother and a Y sex chromosome from their father.
-- Psychology Today.

The only living persons DNA Jesus had was from His mother.
So, the question becomes was it necessary for Jesus to possess a Y chromosome in His birth and still remain human. I think the question goes deeper than that. First, it must be assumed that today's biology of the human body is correct and true. Second, was it necessary for Jesus to not have a human male's chromosome and still remain human through and through? I'll have to think about that but only in the sense that my answer up front is yes but that's to maintain that Jesus was truly human which is necessary in my present mind regarding His hupostasis.
miamited said:
I don't have a problem with believing any of the miracles that God reveals to us in His Scriptures. I mean, I'm even one who believes that some 6,000 years ago there wasn't a single heavenly body in all of the existing universe that we see with our eyes today. I have no problem believing that the sun literally stood in place in the sky over Jerusalem for nearly an entire day. I'm down with all of the miracles of God, which is why I'm asking the question.

God bless,
Ted
Click to expand...
 
jeremiah1five said:
Let's look at the facts.
Each human cell contains 23 pairs of chromosomes that carry DNA within their nucleus. The X and Y chromosomes, commonly referred to as the sex chromosomes, are one such pair. They determine the biological sex, reproductive organs, and sexual characteristics that develop in a person. Female (XX) mammals inherit one X chromosome from each parent, but males (XY) receive an X from their mother and a Y sex chromosome from their father.
-- Psychology Today.

The only living persons DNA Jesus had was from His mother.
So, the question becomes was it necessary for Jesus to possess a Y chromosome in His birth and still remain human. I think the question goes deeper than that. First, it must be assumed that today's biology of the human body is correct and true. Second, was it necessary for Jesus to not have a human male's chromosome and still remain human through and through? I'll have to think about that but only in the sense that my answer up front is yes but that's to maintain that Jesus was truly human which is necessary in my present mind regarding His hupostasis.
Click to expand...
This may be debated.

There may be 20,000 coding genes in a persons DNA. I do not know. So there is a lot of information room for family history.

Mississippi redneck
eddif
 
eddif said:
This may be debated.

There may be 20,000 coding genes in a persons DNA. I do not know. So there is a lot of information room for family history.

Mississippi redneck
eddif
Click to expand...
And the rest of the story,

That is just 2% of the total capacity.

eddif
 
jeremiah1five said:
I can agree with that. However, the word "good" does not mean 'morally' good. It means "good" [enough] or "to specification, like God saying to Himself (and He did) that creation was to His 'specification' and a job well done.
I also agree they didn't know evil however they were created sinful/evil. All the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil did was give them the KNOWLEDGE of their creation. Until God said "Thou shalt not" in the Garden they knew only "good" (and I put that in quotation marks) because they had not yet known evil/sin until the commandment came and as Paul said in Romans 7 "sin revived and it slew me."

I agree.

It was God that wanted to show His creation that He was sinful. The existence of the Law/Command of "Thou shalt not" as Paul says again in Romans shows us that we are sinners before we sin. If there is no law or command against spitting on the sidewalk that doesn't mean I don't know how to spit. But when the Law/Command comes that says "Don't spit on the sidewalk" spitting is in my ability to do whether or not I do it (spit.)
They didn't "become" sinful. They were already sinful for that is how God created them. They were not created holy for holiness is the Nature of God and God does not reduplicate His Nature in man for the simple fact being that He just doesn't do it. If God reduplicated His Nature of Holy in man, then God would have to reduplicate ALL His Nature and Attributes else man would fall short of God's glory. There is ONLY ONE Person who can stand before a Holy God and that is a Holy Son. Man was created fallen short of the glory of God and the Greek word for that is "harmatia" which means, "missing the mark."
What is the "mark" that was missed?
The glory of God.

But those saints and Christians in the Old Testament that looked forward in faith to God fulfilling His Promise of Redemption. For before "faith came, we [they] were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed" (Gal. 3:23) and that revelation was the Advent of the Promised Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
This sin thing
Man was made very good.
Where did the sin come from.

Ecclesiastics 7:29 kjv
29. Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.

Inventions:
Disobedience
Murder
Theft
Hatred
Fornication
etc.

Man was not made sinful he became sinful.

Lucifer was made in what state?
Ezekiel 28:15 kjv
15. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

You know perhaps I can not read, or think?
Where did sin come from? The desire to be like God. That is what was suggested to Eve.

Man was made very good. Man fell into sin.
Man became sinful.

Man did not have the spiritual gifts and the promise of eternal life till Pentecost. Jesus secured the way around sin.

Who told you man was made sinful?

Mississippi redneck
eddif
 
Hi jeremiah1five
jeremiah1five said:
I can agree with that. However, the word "good" does not mean 'morally' good.
Click to expand...
I'd certainly question that concept. Why would something that was good and, according to the record, there was no sin until the transgression of eating the forbidden fruit, not be 'morally' good? Me thinks you are picking at nits while swallowing the camel here.

God bless,
Ted
 
miamited said:
How do you know that?

God bless,
Ted
Click to expand...
The sin nature as I believe to this point derives from the Federal Headship of Adam. He was responsible for the woman although Paul says the woman was in the transgression. This does not make Mary sinless in her own birth as she was born from man and woman and clearly states [her] "spirit rejoices in God [my] Savior" (Lk. 1:47), but that the sin nature derives from the man before God. In Jesus' birth, remove the man from the equation and Jesus is born human but without a sin nature.
This is my understanding at this date and time and unless you can provide Scripture to contradict or add new information then as I said to this point in time this is my understanding.
 
eddif said:
This sin thing
Man was made very good.
Where did the sin come from.

Ecclesiastics 7:29 kjv
29. Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.

Inventions:
Disobedience
Murder
Theft
Hatred
Fornication
etc.

Man was not made sinful he became sinful.
Click to expand...
In what state was Adam created?
If there is only ONE God, there is NONE like Him and He gives His glory to NO ONE, then the first Adam was created fallen short of the glory of God. There is only ONE Person who can stand before a Holy God and be His equal and that is a Holy Son (second Adam).
God doesn't reduplicate or copy or give His glory to NO ONE. Thus, Adam was created "missing the mark" of the glory of God. The word is "harmatia" and it is translated "sin" in the KJV. Adam was created sinful. He sinned. Sin comes from sinners.

13 As saith the proverb of the ancients, Wickedness proceedeth from the wicked:
1 Sa 24:12–13.

And who's to say this 'ancient proverb' did not come out of Adam's time.
Sin comes from sinner. Sin does not come from holy.
We (and Adam) sin because we are (and he was created) sinner.
We are not sinners because we sin.
eddif said:
Lucifer was made in what state?
Ezekiel 28:15 kjv
15. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
Click to expand...
The word "perfect" merely means "complete" just as the word "good" in the creation narrative means "to specification." It does not mean holy.
The angels that sinned were created sinful which is why sin was FOUND in them. Not that God didn't know the finished product but that for His purposes it was necessary to halt Lucifer's and the angels that sinned (in their minds) rebellion and cast them down to hell delivered unto chains of darkness to await judgment day (2 Pet. 2:4.)
For His purpose.
eddif said:
You know perhaps I can not read, or think?
Where did sin come from? The desire to be like God. That is what was suggested to Eve.
Click to expand...
Sin comes from a sin nature man was created with and men are born with. The origin of sin comes from the person who is less than God which means missing the mark of His standard or glory and fallen short of His glory. You'll notice Christ was Holy and did not sin. If Adam was created holy then God gave His nature and glory to a created being and that being sinned which is a contradiction to holiness. Sin comes from sinner.
eddif said:
Man was made very good. Man fell into sin.
Man became sinful.
Click to expand...
Man sinned because he was created sinful. Why do you have a hard time with this simple fact? Good does not mean holy.
eddif said:
Man did not have the spiritual gifts and the promise of eternal life till Pentecost. Jesus secured the way around sin.
Who told you man was made sinful?
Mississippi redneck
eddif
Click to expand...
Reason and the Word of God. And to this date the Holy Spirit has not contradicted Himself.
 
miamited said:
Hi jeremiah1five

I'd certainly question that concept. Why would something that was good and, according to the record, there was no sin until the transgression of eating the forbidden fruit, not be 'morally' good? Me thinks you are picking at nits while swallowing the camel here.

God bless,
Ted
Click to expand...
Where did sin come from? Was it hiding in the bushes until Adam called it out?
Men are born with a sin nature. The sin nature that was passed down from the first man's genes came from the first man who sinned because he was created a sinner. That's why he sinned. He sinned because he was a sinner.

13 As saith the proverb of the ancients, Wickedness proceedeth from the wicked:
1 Sa 24:12–13.

Is that clear enough?
 
jeremiah1five said:
Where did sin come from? Was it hiding in the bushes until Adam called it out?
Men are born with a sin nature. The sin nature that was passed down from the first man's genes came from the first man who sinned because he was created a sinner. That's why he sinned. He sinned because he was a sinner.

13 As saith the proverb of the ancients, Wickedness proceedeth from the wicked:
1 Sa 24:12–13.

Is that clear enough?
Click to expand...
Hi jeremiah1five

I'm guessing that you and I are talking about two different things. Only men are born with a sin nature?

God bless,
Ted
 
Hi again jeremiah1five

You posted:
jeremiah1five said:
The only living persons DNA Jesus had was from His mother.
Click to expand...
I asked:
miamited said:
How do you know that?
Click to expand...
Now you've gone on and on about man's sin nature, but that isn't what my question was asking about your statement. I'm asking "HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THE ONLY LIVING PERSON'S DNA JESUS HAD WAS FROM HIS MOTHER"?

How do you know that the only living person's DNA that Jesus had was from his mother? I understand all about how sin works so please don't keep going over that old argument. How do you know that Jesus had Mary's DNA?

God bless,
Ted
 
miamited said:
Hi again jeremiah1five

You posted:

I asked:

Now you've gone on and on about man's sin nature, but that isn't what my question was asking about your statement. I'm asking "HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THE ONLY LIVING PERSON'S DNA JESUS HAD WAS FROM HIS MOTHER"?

How do you know that the only living person's DNA that Jesus had was from his mother? I understand all about how sin works so please don't keep going over that old argument. How do you know that Jesus had Mary's DNA?

God bless,
Ted
Click to expand...
I was bringing contrast between the birth of a man and Jesus.

Because Jesus was born through a woman without the man. So, He was born with His mother's DNA without a man's DNA.
The other alternative is that God created male DNA for Him that no other man had ever possessed but there's a problem with that.
Or,
God used the DNA from a male that was born and died before Jesus' birth but there's a problem with that also.
The only thing left that defines His humanity is that He was conceived with His mother's DNA alone.
 
jeremiah1five said:
Man sinned because he was created sinful. Why do you have a hard time with this simple fact? Good does not mean holy.
Click to expand...
It has taken weeks to find out why you state this fact, and the explanation is going to be pretty long. I also do not want to insult you.
Apple smart phones and pre prepared posts are hard for me.

I can discuss this with you on private messages, but then this is serious stuff that needs to be resolved.

I am open to suggestions. I think I can make sense of the confusion. I feel I see how you base your statement.

Mississippi redneck
eddif
 
eddif said:
It has taken weeks to find out why you state this fact, and the explanation is going to be pretty long. I also do not want to insult you.
Apple smart phones and pre prepared posts are hard for me.

I can discuss this with you on private messages, but then this is serious stuff that needs to be resolved.

I am open to suggestions. I think I can make sense of the confusion. I feel I see how you base your statement.

Mississippi redneck
eddif
Click to expand...
Yes, I don't like to use iPhone to post unless it's a quick response.
Let me PM you right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top