Kinda silly, kinda serious question

[Windfish]

Jesus has no biological father, so my question is this: does he have complete DNA? I ask because I am doing a lot of research on 1) Eucharistic miracles and 2) exuding sacred icons and images. The one common link between them is that the scientists who analyze the blood are able to determine that the blood is human, but they cannot can get a mapping of the genetic code. The scientists who have worked on this have said that this is a very unusual phenomena.

Another question: how would the lack of a full DNA affect the teaching that Jesus is fully man?

 

[DavidFilmer]

Jesus has no biological father, so my question is this: does he have complete DNA?

The Church has never taught on this question. Some theologians (especially scientific theologians) have offered contrary opinions.

The one common link between them is that the scientists who analyze the blood are able to determine that the blood is human, but they cannot can get a mapping of the genetic code.

I assume this blood was collected from the Shroud of Turin. The Church has never claimed that this relic is authentic.

Another question: how would the lack of a full DNA affect the teaching that Jesus is fully man?

No. The Church teaches that Jesus was fully human in nature, not in genetics. The Church has nothing to say about molecules.

 

[Samuel63]

We have to speculate here. Maybe Jesus has DNA almost indentical to Mary - XX vs XY.

These are questions we will know for sure, a short time after we enter heaven - our eternal reward.

 

[kepha1]

That’s why we call the Incarnation a mystery. A mystery is not contrary to human reason, but above it.

 

[Insight]

Jesus has no biological father, so my question is this: does he have complete DNA? I ask because I am doing a lot of research on 1) Eucharistic miracles and 2) exuding sacred icons and images. The one common link between them is that the scientists who analyze the blood are able to determine that the blood is human, but they cannot can get a mapping of the genetic code. The scientists who have worked on this have said that this is a very unusual phenomena.

Another question: how would the lack of a full DNA affect the teaching that Jesus is fully man?

God made Adam out of dust, it would be reasonable to presume that He supplemented whatever was necessary concerning DNA.

I assume this blood was collected from the Shroud of Turin.

Blood was collected and reported to be type AB blood. It also appears that the 14th Century C-14 date has been proven to be in error:

DatingTheShroud.com/

God Bless

 

[puzzleannie]

Jesus has no biological father, so my question is this: does he have complete DNA? I a

yes
you do not think the Creator of the universe whose Son became man for our sakes could not handle this?

your issue is not about whether Jesus is fully human, your issue is with the nature of the Trinity and the power of God.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Blood was collected and reported to be type AB blood. It also appears that the 14th Century C-14 date has been proven to be in error

Fine, whatever. My statement was that the Catholic Church has not officially recognized the Shroud of Turin as an authentic relic. I’m pretty sure I’m correct.

 

[kepha1]

Fine, whatever. My statement was that the Catholic Church has not officially recognized the Shroud of Turin as an authentic relic. I’m pretty sure I’m correct.

You are correct. (but I think it is authentic) The Shroud is an icon that teaches about Holy Saturday. That makes it’s origins secondary to the meaning. Like the Pope, we need to keep the priorities in order.

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=6207

 

[Windfish]

Actually, I am talking about Eucharistic miracles such as the Lanciano one.

Interesting distinction between nature and genetics, David.

 

[Insight]

Fine, whatever. My statement was that the Catholic Church has not officially recognized the Shroud of Turin as an authentic relic. I’m pretty sure I’m correct.

Pope John Paul II made a statement that indicated He believed it to be authentic. The Church treats it as if it were authentic. But I think you are correct, there doesn’t seem to be an official statement.

God Bless

 

[ClayPots47]

Asexual reproduction, but probably not parthenogenesis, because with parthenogenesis, the offspring would be female, as is the mother. Asexual reproduction occurs in nature, but not in humans, but it could occur. Jesus would be genetically identical to Mary, except he was male rather than female. Someday perhaps further study may be done of blood from the Shroud of Turin or the Miracle of Lanciano (which both have the same AB blood type), and the mitochondria that is inherited from the mother can be identified. Asexual reproduction would make Jesus no less fully human than sexual reproduction, and Science and Faith would not contradict one another. The Church hasn’t declared just how Jesus was physically created, just like the Church hasn’t declared how the world was created, but allows us to accept theories such as Big Bang and Evolution. So we could accept that Jesus was the product of an extremely rare, perhaps miraculous, form of asexual reproduction. That works for me! When it comes down to it, we simply don’t know; we have to rely on Faith and accept the teaching of Christ’s two natures, fully human, fully divine, regardless of His genetic makeup and DNA

 

[Insight]

The Church hasn’t declared just how Jesus was physically created, just like the Church hasn’t declared how the world was created, but allows us to accept theories such as Big Bang and Evolution.

That makes sense, but I tend to think God supplied the necessary information required in Jesus’ DNA (Son of God). “The most widely accepted scientific creation scenario is the Big Bang theory, which holds that everything in the Universe was created from nothing. Coincidentally, the Christian Bible likewise asserts that God created everything from nothing (Genesis 1:1) (Hebrews 11:3). Pope John Paul II felt that the Big Bang theory was the Creation scenario closest to that portrayed in the Bible”.

ArguingWithAtheists.com/Pages/Bible_References.htm

God Bless

 

[DavidFilmer]

Pope John Paul II made a statement that indicated He believed it to be authentic. The Church treats it as if it were authentic.

Citation would be appreciated. I’m pretty sure JP2 did not, and the Church does not (although the Church treats and preserves the Shroud as a historic artifact (much as a museum curator would treat any ancient artifact), I’m pretty sure the Church does not, in any official capacity, regard or treat it as the actual Burial Shroud of Jesus).

 

[danserr]

Jesus has no biological father, so my question is this: does he have complete DNA? I ask because I am doing a lot of research on 1) Eucharistic miracles and 2) exuding sacred icons and images. The one common link between them is that the scientists who analyze the blood are able to determine that the blood is human, but they cannot can get a mapping of the genetic code. The scientists who have worked on this have said that this is a very unusual phenomena.

Another question: how would the lack of a full DNA affect the teaching that Jesus is fully man?

Like DF said, the Church has no official position and their are different views. C.S. Lewis, (In Miracles, I think), suggested that maybe God miraculously created a spermatozoa in Mary. I don’t mean to be irreverent, but it’s plausible and would give Jesus the full genetic code.

 

[Insight]

Citation would be appreciated. I’m pretty sure JP2 did not, and the Church does not (although the Church treats and preserves the Shroud as a historic artifact (much as a museum curator would treat any ancient artifact), I’m pretty sure the Church does not, in any official capacity, regard or treat it as the actual Burial Shroud of Jesus).

Quotes by Pope John Paul II from Vatican website:

“In the light of Christ’s presence in our midst, I then stopped before the Shroud, the precious Linen that can help us better to understand the mystery of the love of God’s Son for us. Before the Shroud, the intense and agonizing image of an unspeakable torment, I wish to thank the Lord for this unique gift, which asks for the believer’s loving attention and complete willingness to follow the Lord.”

“The Shroud is a challenge to our intelligence. It first of all requires of every person, particularly the researcher, that he humbly grasp the profound message it sends to his reason and his life. The mysterious fascination of the Shroud forces questions to be raised about the Sacred Linen and the historical life of Jesus.”

“For the believer, what counts above all is that the Shroud is a mirror of the Gospel. In fact, if we reflect on the Sacred Linen, we cannot escape the idea that the image it presents has such a profound relationship with what the Gospels tell of Jesus’ passion and death, that every sensitive person feels inwardly touched and moved at beholding it. Whoever approaches it is also aware that the Shroud does not hold people’s hearts to itself, but turns them to him, at whose service the Father’s loving providence has put it.”

Vatican.va/Holy_Father/John_Paul_ii/Travels/Documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_24051998_sindone_en.html

God Bless

 

[Lost_Sheep]

Does any of it really matter?

 

[Windfish]

Does any of it really matter?

Well, it helps make sense of the results of the blood testing.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Quotes by Pope John Paul II from Vatican website:

 

[Insight]

Well, that’s pretty good stuff. It does not rise to the level of declaring that the Shroud is authentic, but it does establish that the Shroud is pretty special.

However, your source link does not work (at least not for me). It keeps taking me to the Vatican homepage. Maybe they have (once again) reorganized their website. However, for the benefit of anyone who might follow this thread, I was able to find it in L’Osservatore Romano - 27 May 1998.

Something got messed up with the url, try this:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/travels/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_24051998_sindone_en.html

I didn’t say that the Church officially declared it authentic, only that “Pope John Paul II made a statement that indicated He believed it to be authentic. The Church treats it as if it were authentic. But I think you are correct, there doesn’t seem to be an official statement.”

God Bless
God Bless

 

[Lost_Sheep]

Well, it helps make sense of the results of the blood testing.

Yes, but who really cares about Jesus’ DNA? Has he been suspected of a crime? What about his fingerprints or dental records?

Why all the concern over things that really don’t matter even if you did know the answer?