C
Cara_Serrano
Guest
I’m confused. I thought a person’s “Jewishness” was passed through the mother’s side of the genetic equation.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
Sir_Anthony
Guest
We have broken a hundred posts so I think it will be a good time to close this thread, thank you for your participation, and look forward to another thread for an another day.
A
Awake
Guest
Well, I don’t want to get into too much detail, but somebody who has an XX chromosome pattern would not have a fully formed set of testes and would not be able to produce sperm.Keep in mind this is the definition of a male after the discovery of genes and chromosomes.
P
pcusack1
Guest
Some scholars believe that the two genalogies of Matthew and Luke are Theological Constructs in order to show that Jesus is a priest as well as a King. Considering that Matthew has 25 generations more than Luke, then we know they can’t be actual genealogies of Christ. That still leaves the problem that Jesus must be a descendant of David.
I suspose that the Jews knew him to be a descendant of David, so they could have recognized him as a possible Messiah. Of course Jesus father is God so if Jesus carries the Y DNA of David, it must come form God, thus" son of God" and “son of David”.
That’s my last word
I suspose that the Jews knew him to be a descendant of David, so they could have recognized him as a possible Messiah. Of course Jesus father is God so if Jesus carries the Y DNA of David, it must come form God, thus" son of God" and “son of David”.
That’s my last word
G
Geremia
Guest
I have asked the same question, and, although St. Thomas Aquinas did not know about DNA and chromosomes, I found the first two articles of this section from his Summa Theologica particularly illuminating: The matter from which the Saviour’s body was conceived (Tertia Pars, Q. 31)Now my question is what would Jesus’ other 23 chromosomes be (besides Mary’s).
E
Eddie_Mac
Guest
My church tells me that Jesus was truly God and truly man. I don’t have to understand to believe.
Jesus tells me that He is the Son of God. That means he was a man, not a strange mixup of chromosomes. He was perfect in every way. He had an X and a Y chromosome. His X came from the Blessed Virgin. She also was perfect in every way. She was XX.
This is one of those mysteries that will be answered one day. I do not think that going off on tangents discussing whether Jesus’ or Mary’s DNA was not normal human male and female is the thing to do.
That interjects imperfection and My God and My Blessed Mother are not imperfect.
It is a very interesting question, though. If anyone is ever blessed with a little Divine Inspiration, please post!
Eddie Mac
Jesus tells me that He is the Son of God. That means he was a man, not a strange mixup of chromosomes. He was perfect in every way. He had an X and a Y chromosome. His X came from the Blessed Virgin. She also was perfect in every way. She was XX.
This is one of those mysteries that will be answered one day. I do not think that going off on tangents discussing whether Jesus’ or Mary’s DNA was not normal human male and female is the thing to do.
That interjects imperfection and My God and My Blessed Mother are not imperfect.
It is a very interesting question, though. If anyone is ever blessed with a little Divine Inspiration, please post!
Eddie Mac
N
Namesake
Guest
So simply said, yet quite eloquent. I admire your faith.My church tells me that Jesus was truly God and truly man. I don’t have to understand to believe.
Jesus tells me that He is the Son of God. That means he was a man, not a strange mixup of chromosomes. He was perfect in every way. He had an X and a Y chromosome. His X came from the Blessed Virgin. She also was perfect in every way. She was XX.
This is one of those mysteries that will be answered one day. I do not think that going off on tangents discussing whether Jesus’ or Mary’s DNA was not normal human male and female is the thing to do.
That interjects imperfection and My God and My Blessed Mother are not imperfect.
It is a very interesting question, though. If anyone is ever blessed with a little Divine Inspiration, please post!
Eddie Mac
B
Benadam
Guest
I didn’t read the whole thread so forgive me if this has been posted.
If not does it have any bearing on the question of lineage or the Jewish requirement of lineage as it pertains to the revelation of Christ?
Mathew 22
41 And the Pharisees being gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42 Saying: What think you of Christ? whose son is he? They say to him: David’s. 43 He saith to them: How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying: 44 The Lord said to my Lord, Sit on my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool? 45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? 46 And no man was able to answer him a word; neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.
If not does it have any bearing on the question of lineage or the Jewish requirement of lineage as it pertains to the revelation of Christ?
Mathew 22
41 And the Pharisees being gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42 Saying: What think you of Christ? whose son is he? They say to him: David’s. 43 He saith to them: How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying: 44 The Lord said to my Lord, Sit on my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool? 45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? 46 And no man was able to answer him a word; neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.
P
pcusack1
Guest
Ps 132
1The LORD has (R)sworn to David
A truth from which He will not turn back:
“(S)Of the fruit of your body I will set upon your throne.
12"If your sons will keep My covenant
And My testimony which I will teach them,
Their sons also shall (T)sit upon your throne forever.”
Jerimiah 33:17
17"For thus says the LORD, 'David shall (A)never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel;
How does Jesus fit these descriptions since he is clearly notthe fruit of the body of David.
Matt 1:
16Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, (I)who is called the Messiah.
Luke 3:
23(AE)When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of (AF)Joseph, the son of Eli,
I would be grateful if someone could show how Jesus is the Jewish Messiah based on these verses.
1The LORD has (R)sworn to David
A truth from which He will not turn back:
“(S)Of the fruit of your body I will set upon your throne.
12"If your sons will keep My covenant
And My testimony which I will teach them,
Their sons also shall (T)sit upon your throne forever.”
Jerimiah 33:17
17"For thus says the LORD, 'David shall (A)never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel;
How does Jesus fit these descriptions since he is clearly notthe fruit of the body of David.
Matt 1:
16Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, (I)who is called the Messiah.
Luke 3:
23(AE)When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of (AF)Joseph, the son of Eli,
I would be grateful if someone could show how Jesus is the Jewish Messiah based on these verses.
V
Voco_proTatiano
Guest
No.Thank you for the website. However, a Kingship must be descendant form bloodline -not adoption. An adopted son can inherit possessions, but not a Throne. It bloodline determined, no?
Th ‘Jewish’ culture of that time had no concept of adoption as being any different from natural birthright.
Indeed, natural birthright can be set aside in favour of an adoptee.That indeed is Our Lord’s message of the New Testament.
The blood descent of Jacob are rejected, while Our Lord’s acceptors are the new elect, or chosen, and promised acknowledgement before the Father.
As for XY and XX genetics, there are varients.
Mary could have been XXY. This is usually sterile, setting aside parthenogenesis.
XXY can also present as ‘male’, it is just a matter of which chromosome is switched off.
Mary’s extra Y could be suppressed, so presenting female, whereas one of Our Lord’s extra Xs , suppressed would present as male.
E
Eddie_Mac
Guest
Balderdash.No.
Th ‘Jewish’ culture of that time had no concept of adoption as being any different from natural birthright.
Indeed, natural birthright can be set aside in favour of an adoptee.That indeed is Our Lord’s message of the New Testament.
The blood descent of Jacob are rejected, while Our Lord’s acceptors are the new elect, or chosen, and promised acknowledgement before the Father.
As for XY and XX genetics, there are varients.
Mary could have been XXY. This is usually sterile, setting aside parthenogenesis.
XXY can also present as ‘male’, it is just a matter of which chromosome is switched off.
Mary’s extra Y could be suppressed, so presenting female, whereas one of Our Lord’s extra Xs , suppressed would present as male.
Does trashing Jesus and the Blessed Virgin actually make you feel good?
Eddie Mac
S
Spirithound
Guest
VpT said nothing offensive! It’s just scientific speculation.Balderdash.
Does trashing Jesus and the Blessed Virgin actually make you feel good?
Eddie Mac
V
Voco_proTatiano
Guest
Thankyou Spirithound.VpT said nothing offensive! It’s just scientific speculation.
Indeed, I was just postulating that, correctly interpreted, genetics does not necessarily make the Virgin Birth impossible.
Neither do I imply that a non-‘normal’, permitted variant in the gender defining genome, makes any carrier thereof, a defective human being.
Let us face it, any miracle involves a non-‘normal’ set of circumstances.
That is, in a nutshell, how a miracle is defined.
P
pcusack1
Guest
No.
Th ‘Jewish’ culture of that time had no concept of adoption as being any different from natural birthright.
I
This is taken form the website I previously quoted in the same thread:
To illustrate this point, suppose Prince Charles and Princess Diana adopted a baby boy; he certainly would not be in line for the throne.
Jewish law is far closer to British common law than to ancient Roman law. In Judaism, personal status is based on bloodlines and lineage, the moment of birth gives a Jew his or her identity. No legal procedure or court decree can erase that identity.
V
Voco_proTatiano
Guest
Voco proTatiano;5128523:
No, ABSLUTELY NO.No.
Th ‘Jewish’ culture of that time had no concept of adoption as being any different from natural birthright.
I
This is taken form the website I previously quoted in the same thread:
To illustrate this point, suppose Prince Charles and Princess Diana adopted a baby boy; he certainly would not be in line for the throne.
Jewish law is far closer to British common law than to ancient Roman law. In Judaism, personal status is based on bloodlines and lineage, the moment of birth gives a Jew his or her identity. No legal procedure or court decree can erase that identity.
It is the moment when the FATHER acknowledges the Child as His.
This is the act of begetting, as understood in the old way.
On the eighth day, when a father presents his son for circumcission, he says:
“Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee”
See: Psalm 2: 7:-
Dominus dixit ad me: Filius meus es tu, ego hodie genui te.
The LORD said to me: Thou art my son, today I have begotten thee.
This is the sense that begetting was then understood, not in the limited medical sense we now mistakenly use it.
P
pcusack1
Guest
Thank you for taking the time.
However, the point is that the Messiah must be descendant of David (through King Solomon) to be the Messiah according to Scripture - not necessarily a Son of God.
Best Regards!
However, the point is that the Messiah must be descendant of David (through King Solomon) to be the Messiah according to Scripture - not necessarily a Son of God.
Best Regards!
E
Eddie_Mac
Guest
IMHO, anyone stating that Our Savior and the Blessed Mother had aberrant DNA is not scientific speculation and is not a reasonable explanation.VpT said nothing offensive! It’s just scientific speculation.
The only proper explanation is that Jesus’ genetics came 1/2 from G_D through the Holy Spirtit and the other half from the Blessed Virgin.
I stand by my comment. It is tantamount to trash talk about the perfection of Our Savior and His Mother.
Eddie Mac
V
Voco_proTatiano
Guest
Hi Eddie,IMHO, anyone stating that Our Savior and the Blessed Mother had aberrant DNA is not scientific speculation and is not a reasonable explanation.
The only proper explanation is that Jesus’ genetics came 1/2 from G_D through the Holy Spirtit and the other half from the Blessed Virgin.
I stand by my comment. It is tantamount to trash talk about the perfection of Our Savior and His Mother.
Eddie Mac
You miss the point.
All G_d’s miracles, at least the ones that we have any understanding of, do not involve the breaking of any of G_d’s laws, either scriptural, or physical.
What they seem to do is play a clever tune on permitted variations within those laws.
The Creation, and indeed the existance of the Universe depends on quantum uncertainty, which seems to fly in th face of Newtonian Physics.
“Newtonian” genetics claims that there is only male, XY, and female, XX.
“Quantum” genetics however shows a quite large variety of permissible, and functional combinations, of which XXY is quite common.
If G_d should use this variation from “Newtonian” genetics to beget from a Virgin, by parthenogenesis, a male offspring, then what can be your possible objection?
All miracles are possible, only improbable.
Ask a quantum physicist what the quantum improbability of the universe is, based upon Plank’s constant, and you will get an answer that it involves a number with uncountable zeros.
Improbable, but not impossible.
We know it is possible, for ecce, sumus!
E
Eddie_Mac
Guest
Hi Voco,Hi Eddie,
You miss the point.
All G_d’s miracles, at least the ones that we have any understanding of, do not involve the breaking of any of G_d’s laws, either scriptural, or physical.
What they seem to do is play a clever tune on permitted variations within those laws.
The Creation, and indeed the existance of the Universe depends on quantum uncertainty, which seems to fly in th face of Newtonian Physics.
“Newtonian” genetics claims that there is only male, XY, and female, XX.
“Quantum” genetics however shows a quite large variety of permissible, and functional combinations, of which XXY is quite common.
If G_d should use this variation from “Newtonian” genetics to beget from a Virgin, by parthenogenesis, a male offspring, then what can be your possible objection?
All miracles are possible, only improbable.
Ask a quantum physicist what the quantum improbability of the universe is, based upon Plank’s constant, and you will get an answer that it involves a number with uncountable zeros.
Improbable, but not impossible.
We know it is possible, for ecce, sumus!
No, I do not miss your point. I understand your point. You are attempting to explain what you don’t understand in man’s terms.
I am stating what I believe because I understand that Jesus was not formed in the womb of the Virgin by any normal meeting of sperm and egg. I cannot explain it, I don’t need to explain exactly how. It doesn’t matter, at least to me.
Mat 1:18
"Now this is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about. When his mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found with child through the holy Spirit. "
Luke 1:34-35
But Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?”
And the angel said to her in reply, "The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.
Two examples of where Jesus received His genetics. They came directly from G_D.
Eddie Mac
V
Voco_proTatiano
Guest
Exactly, I was just pointing out a possible pathway that G_d might have manipulated to achieve this end.Hi Voco,
No, I do not miss your point. I understand your point. You are attempting to explain what you don’t understand in man’s terms.
I am stating what I believe because I understand that Jesus was not formed in the womb of the Virgin by any normal meeting of sperm and egg. I cannot explain it, I don’t need to explain exactly how. It doesn’t matter, at least to me.
Mat 1:18
"Now this is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about. When his mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found with child through the holy Spirit. "
Luke 1:34-35
But Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?”
And the angel said to her in reply, "The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.
Two examples of where Jesus received His genetics. They came directly from G_D.
Eddie Mac
We all accept the BVM was/is also special. Her being a genetic variant of female provides the pathway for the Virgin Birth, And that variant, makes Her special, not deformed.
Let us not forget, It was G_d who made her special, and the vehicle G_d used to generate that speciality would have been in the way of not breaking the laws of the Universe created by G_d. In other words, possible even if extremely improbable.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.