Mary, Jesus, and Genetics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mungling
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mungling

Guest
So, I’m going to get straight to the point. When Jesus was immaculately conceived, did Mary act as a gestational surrogate mother (all the necessary material - i.e. the zygote - was already there and Mary simply brought Him to maturity) or did Jesus owe some of his genetic material to Mary? Would Jesus have resembled Mary in any way, or would He be a distinct? Or was His physical body derived solely from Mary, with her genetic material simply having been randomized.

I realize there is might be no real answer to this, but I’m curious to discover whether the Church has an opinion on this.
 
The Immaculate Conception refers to Mary’s conception in the womb of Anna, while we refer to Jesus as the Virgin Birth.
 
So, I’m going to get straight to the point. When Jesus was immaculately conceived, did Mary act as a gestational surrogate mother (all the necessary material - i.e. the zygote - was already there and Mary simply brought Him to maturity) or did Jesus owe some of his genetic material to Mary? Would Jesus have resembled Mary in any way, or would He be a distinct? Or was His physical body derived solely from Mary, with her genetic material simply having been randomized.

I realize there is might be no real answer to this, but I’m curious to discover whether the Church has an opinion on this.
I am not sure of the exact teaching, but I do know that your first proposition is not Church teaching. I believe the Church teaches that Mary conceived Jesus when she was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, her ovum was used in the conception and He went through normal human gestational stages before birth. I do not know that there is any further teaching on the genetics, other than He got his humanity from Mary.

The conception of Jesus is not referred to as the Immaculate Conception, though. The Immaculate Conception refers to the conception of Mary.
 
So, I’m going to get straight to the point. When Jesus was immaculately conceived, did Mary act as a gestational surrogate mother (all the necessary material - i.e. the zygote - was already there and Mary simply brought Him to maturity) or did Jesus owe some of his genetic material to Mary? Would Jesus have resembled Mary in any way, or would He be a distinct? Or was His physical body derived solely from Mary, with her genetic material simply having been randomized.

I realize there is might be no real answer to this, but I’m curious to discover whether the Church has an opinion on this.
…the difference between Jesus’ conception and John the Baptist (as well as the previous prophets/annointed/selected children through which Yahweh would bring about His Salvific Plan) is that there would not be any male counterpart to Mary’s biological imput:

31 Look! You are to conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you must name him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his ancestor David; 33 he will rule over the House of Jacob for ever and his reign will have no end.’ 34 Mary said to the angel, ‘But how can this come about, since I have no knowledge of man?’ 35 The angel answered, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will cover you with its shadow. And so the child will be holy and will be called Son of God. 36 And I tell you this too: your cousin Elizabeth also, in her old age, has conceived a son, and she whom people called barren is now in her sixth month, 37 for nothing is impossible to God.’ (St. Luke 1:31-37)

God, the Holy Spirit, used Mary’s generic composition to infuse her womb with the pertinent biochemestry to produce a fertilized egg. We can iether accept Yahweh God’s Word that there’s nothing impossible to Him or we can speculate about the possibilities or improvability of things pertaining to God.

Conversely, some of the very people that insist in not being able to comprehend God’s Omnipotence (genenic composition of humanity based on one set of parents/the Incarnation of the Word) argue for the missing link being a sngle monkey-like female that produced not only all branches that lead to homosapiens but the less developed homo erectus as well, and even lesser developed monkey-like creatures–wow, no problem with that genetic bank!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
The Immaculate Conception refers to Mary’s conception in the womb of Anna, while we refer to Jesus as the Virgin Birth.
Oh. thats rather embarrassing. Thank you for the correction!
…the difference between Jesus’ conception and John the Baptist (as well as the previous prophets/annointed/selected children through which Yahweh would bring about His Salvific Plan) is that there would not be any male counterpart to Mary’s biological imput:

31 Look! You are to conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you must name him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his ancestor David; 33 he will rule over the House of Jacob for ever and his reign will have no end.’ 34 Mary said to the angel, ‘But how can this come about, since I have no knowledge of man?’ 35 The angel answered, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will cover you with its shadow. And so the child will be holy and will be called Son of God. 36 And I tell you this too: your cousin Elizabeth also, in her old age, has conceived a son, and she whom people called barren is now in her sixth month, 37 for nothing is impossible to God.’ (St. Luke 1:31-37)

God, the Holy Spirit, used Mary’s generic composition to infuse her womb with the pertinent biochemestry to produce a fertilized egg. We can iether accept Yahweh God’s Word that there’s nothing impossible to Him or we can speculate about the possibilities or improvability of things pertaining to God.

Conversely, some of the very people that insist in not being able to comprehend God’s Omnipotence (genenic composition of humanity based on one set of parents/the Incarnation of the Word) argue for the missing link being a sngle monkey-like female that produced not only all branches that lead to homosapiens but the less developed homo erectus as well, and even lesser developed monkey-like creatures–wow, no problem with that genetic bank!

Maran atha!

Angel
That’s a good answer, thank you.
I believe Jesus got his genes from the line of David.
This also works.

Thank you for your responses.
 
I believe Jesus got his genes from the line of David.
…well not in a direct way:

26 In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the House of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. 28 He went in and said to her, ‘Rejoice, you who enjoy God’s favour! The Lord is with you.’ 29 She was deeply disturbed by these words and asked herself what this greeting could mean, 30 but the angel said to her, ‘Mary, do not be afraid; you have won God’s favour. 31 Look! You are to conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you must name him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his ancestor David; 33 he will rule over the House of Jacob for ever and his reign will have no end.’ 34 Mary said to the angel, ‘But how can this come about, since I have no knowledge of man?’ 35 The angel answered, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will cover you with its shadow. And so the child will be holy and will be called Son of God. 36 And I tell you this too: your cousin Elizabeth also, in her old age, has conceived a son, and she whom people called barren is now in her sixth month, 37 for nothing is impossible to God.’ (St. Luke 1:26-37)

18 This is how Jesus Christ came to be born. His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph; but before they came to live together she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. 19 Her husband Joseph, being an upright man and wanting to spare her disgrace, decided to divorce her informally. 20 He had made up his mind to do this when suddenly the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, ‘Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because she has conceived what is in her by the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son and you must name him Jesus, because he is the one who is to save his people from their sins.’ 22 Now all this took place to fulfil what the Lord had spoken through the prophet: 23 Look! the virgin is with child and will give birth to a son whom they will call Immanuel, a name which means ‘God-is-with-us’. 24 When Joseph woke up he did what the angel of the Lord had told him to do: he took his wife to his home; 25 he had not had intercourse with her when she gave birth to a son; and he named him Jesus. (St. Matthew 1:18-25)

Clearly, on both accounts Joseph is not the procreator of Jesus; the issue lies in both unknown facts (Mary’s actual geneology–the Jewish custom was to list only the male lineage; but it is conceivable that Joseph would choose a wife from amongst his own tribe, as was often the custom of those who awaited the Messaiah) and Biblical custom (“The Bible makes no distinction between genetic birth and adoption. See 2Sam 6:23, where Michol the daughter of Saul and the wife of David (1Sam 18:27) had no children. Yet in 2Sam 21:8, it says Michol had five sons. In reality, they were adopted sons of Merob.”–excerpt from: home.inreach.com/bstanley/geneal.htm)

We must also take into account that the Gospels were written years after Jesus’ death which means that for legal and cultural purposes Joseph was Jesus’ father–it is only through Divine Revelation that we are made aware of Jesus’ true Origins; however, the fact still remains, Jesus, the Word Incarnate, came to us through the lineage of David!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
…well not in a direct way:

26 In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the House of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. 28 He went in and said to her, ‘Rejoice, you who enjoy God’s favour! The Lord is with you.’ 29 She was deeply disturbed by these words and asked herself what this greeting could mean, 30 but the angel said to her, ‘Mary, do not be afraid; you have won God’s favour. 31 Look! You are to conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you must name him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his ancestor David; 33 he will rule over the House of Jacob for ever and his reign will have no end.’ 34 Mary said to the angel, ‘But how can this come about, since I have no knowledge of man?’ 35 The angel answered, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will cover you with its shadow. And so the child will be holy and will be called Son of God. 36 And I tell you this too: your cousin Elizabeth also, in her old age, has conceived a son, and she whom people called barren is now in her sixth month, 37 for nothing is impossible to God.’ (St. Luke 1:26-37)

18 This is how Jesus Christ came to be born. His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph; but before they came to live together she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. 19 Her husband Joseph, being an upright man and wanting to spare her disgrace, decided to divorce her informally. 20 He had made up his mind to do this when suddenly the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, ‘Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because she has conceived what is in her by the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son and you must name him Jesus, because he is the one who is to save his people from their sins.’ 22 Now all this took place to fulfil what the Lord had spoken through the prophet: 23 Look! the virgin is with child and will give birth to a son whom they will call Immanuel, a name which means ‘God-is-with-us’. 24 When Joseph woke up he did what the angel of the Lord had told him to do: he took his wife to his home; 25 he had not had intercourse with her when she gave birth to a son; and he named him Jesus. (St. Matthew 1:18-25)

Clearly, on both accounts Joseph is not the procreator of Jesus; the issue lies in both unknown facts (Mary’s actual geneology–the Jewish custom was to list only the male lineage; but it is conceivable that Joseph would choose a wife from amongst his own tribe, as was often the custom of those who awaited the Messaiah) and Biblical custom (“The Bible makes no distinction between genetic birth and adoption. See 2Sam 6:23, where Michol the daughter of Saul and the wife of David (1Sam 18:27) had no children. Yet in 2Sam 21:8, it says Michol had five sons. In reality, they were adopted sons of Merob.”–excerpt from: home.inreach.com/bstanley/geneal.htm)

We must also take into account that the Gospels were written years after Jesus’ death which means that for legal and cultural purposes Joseph was Jesus’ father–it is only through Divine Revelation that we are made aware of Jesus’ true Origins; however, the fact still remains, Jesus, the Word Incarnate, came to us through the lineage of David!

Maran atha!

Angel
Joseph, Mary, nor James either the father of Mary or brother of Joseph may or may not integral to my statement. I am just making a simplistic assertion that God might have wanted the Word made flesh to be encoded with the appropriate genes, genes that would ultimately be traced back to the Sons of God. Or the other way around, the Sons of God received their template from the Son of God, Christ. Christ → Adam, David → Jesus adopted son of Joseph. An interesting relationship since by the Lord’s covenant with his creation we are now the adopted Sons of God to be with them in the Kingdom. What do you think?
 
Joseph, Mary, nor James either the father of Mary or brother of Joseph may or may not integral to my statement. I am just making a simplistic assertion that God might have wanted the Word made flesh to be encoded with the appropriate genes, genes that would ultimately be traced back to the Sons of God.
I concur; regardless of the players and the gene pool, the Incarnation of the Word was through Divine intervention–we know that the Creator can suspend any and all of nature’s accidents (mechanisms) or totally introduce the unthinkable and unattainable into both the spiritual and corporeal realms.
Or the other way around, the Sons of God received their template from the Son of God, Christ. Christ → Adam, David → Jesus adopted son of Joseph. An interesting relationship since by the Lord’s covenant with his creation we are now the adopted Sons of God to be with them in the Kingdom. What do you think?
…this is quite interesting since we know from Scriptures that we were chosen in Christ Jesus before Creation (Ephesian 1:4) and “In the Beginning” we were Created in God’s Image and Likeness… it is as if, through Divine casuality, we are part of Yahweh God’s infinite Existence: the “I AM!”

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top