DNA and Christ's Birth

[cradleGO]

If Jesus was a blend of Mary and Joseph's DNA, then He would have shared many of Joseph's features, which would then have discredited the virgin birth.

I cannot source it, but I believe that some speculate that the first bishop of Jerusalem, Apostle James, not only was called the brother of Jesus, but looked like Him. No one questioned that Jesus was the son of Joseph. He was even called that by the people. The virgin birth is foretold in the Old Testament

The virgin birth has a twist to it, as to human experience, if not Biblically. Women can give birth without having had their hymens broken. I don't say this to diminish the Divinity of Christ, but there are traditions that Mary gave birth without travail. So, that might have been the origin of Jesus' link to the prophecy.

 

[cradleGO]

No. That the named brothers and alluded sisters were the subsequent natural children of Joseph & Mary; that she did not remain a virgin after delivering Jesus.

I do not see where you could have pulled a "second husband" out of my post (though that would not have been sin if Joseph left her as a widow...).

Most people that I have met who insist on them being cousins reject them as "half-siblings."
If Jesus had none of her DNA,

• Mary would have been a surrogate and
• none of her natural children would have been related to Him through her,

but Scripture does not give us enough information to make that assumption.

You said, 'same mother, different father', but you made your explanation clear above. But that is not Church Tradition (capital T, Tradition). So, no. There is a tradition that Joseph was older, and had children by a previous wife. Plus, His cousins would have been called His brothers and sisters as well.

Your whole premise is pretty clearly heretical and is personally offensive. But for this broad audience, I'll say it is not what mainline Christians believe. You should have been born in the 19th century, and could have founded yet another quasi-christianesque weird cult then.

As to being Scriptural, if you're sola scriptura, then you won't accept Orthodox Tradition. But the Church existed before the Scriptures, and more importantly, people lived during that time - no breaks. From that came traditions and Traditions. The Virgin Birth is a Tradition, as well as Scriptural.

 

[prodromos]

I cannot source it, but I believe that some speculate that the first bishop of Jerusalem, Apostle James, not only was called the brother of Jesus, but looked like Him.

You are probably confusing James with the Apostle Thomas, who was called the twin.

No one questioned that Jesus was the son of Joseph. He was even called that by the people.

He was believed to be the son of Joseph because no one learned of the virgin birth until after Christ's resurrection and ascension.

The virgin birth is foretold in the Old Testament

Mary's virgin birth was hidden from the world until the spread of the Gospel.

 

[Qubit]

Her seed has to mean Jesus.

Who is the 'remnant of her seed' in this verse?

Revelation 12:17
"And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."

If her seed is Jesus, then that means Jesus had offspring. It does not work.

My opinion is that the Woman of the Apocalypse is Sarah. She is conceiving Isaac (her seed) which the remnant eventually came from. Ultimately, Sarah is a picture of New Jerusalem who gives birth to the Glorified Body...

Galatians 4:26
"But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all."

Thus, 'her seed' is a type of future promise.

Also if Abraham is Hebrew then He has to be descended from Adam and Eve.

Agreed. We are all descended from Adam and Eve.

We read in Rev about 144,000 that are pure. This is a reference to their DNA. 12,000 from each tribe.

Agreed, however we must realize that this 'pure DNA' was the result of being re-written (engraved) with a new genetic sequence...

Zechariah 3:9
"For behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua; upon one stone shall be seven eyes: behold, I will engrave the graving thereof, saith the LORD of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day."

That happens on Resurrection Day. The Stone with Seven Eyes is what we call a 'Nucleobase'.

There is no such thing as a non-corrupted DNA in any bloodline on the planet. It is a racist philosophy to think that one race is better than another.

The whole point of the flood was the inner marriage and God wanted to keep the Hebrew people pure.

While I agree that the Bible teaches Eugenics, it does not mean that one person's DNA is superior to anyone Elses. God was using Israel as an illustration of a much larger issue having to do with Genetic Engineering (e.g., Giants, etc.). In other words, it is God Eugenics vs. Man Eugenics.

When it comes to our corrupt DNA, every human being on the planet is allegorically born of Hagar...

Galatians 4:25
"For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children."

In other words, Hagar represents the Law of Bondage we are all born into. Again, it is allegory...

Galatians 4:24
"Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar."

Sarah is the New Testament, however none of us have that DNA yet. It is a *future* promise. There is no 'Elite DNA'.

Of course the issue with Abraham is Hagar and Sarah.

Allegorically, as stated in Galatians 4:24.

The child of bondage and the free child.

Old Testament vs. New Testament.

Armageddon has to do with a battle between the descendants of Sarah and the descendants of Hagar.

If that is the case, then the battle is about Law (OT/Hagar) vs. Grace (NT/Sarah).

 

[Diamond7]

If her seed is Jesus, then that means Jesus had offspring. It does not work.

Her remnant is all that belongs to Jesus between Eve and Mary. We are told there are 144,000 pure virgins. To make war talks about Armageddon. This we assume will be a real battle between the descendants of Sarah and the descendants of Hagar. The winner of the battle are those who belong to Jesus. During the 1,000 year reign of Christ we read in Isaiah 66 24 “And they will go out and look on the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; the worms that eat them will not die, the fire that burns them will not be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind.” So we see the fate of those who do not belong to Jesus. They will be a witness and testimony. Of course Gentiles are grafted in to replace the branches that do not produce fruit and are cut off and thrown into the fire.

 

[Diamond7]

Agreed. We are all descended from Adam and Eve.

Everyone is related, not all are descended. Even they say everyone in the last 2,000 years is related. You can produce 8 billion people in 33 generations. Your great-great-great-great-great-grandmother might also be your great-great-great-great-aunt.

 

[Diamond7]

If that is the case, then the battle is about Law (OT/Hagar) vs. Grace (NT/Sarah).

Yes, we are not saved by the law. We are saved because the Grace of God does a work in us. I attended a church called "Grace Church".

 

[Diamond7]

While I agree that the Bible teaches Eugenics, it does not mean that one person's DNA is superior to anyone Elses.

There is a lot of inbreeding with the Hebrew people so like the Amish there is a lot of heredity diseases. They do a fair amount of research on their DNA.

 

[cradleGO]

You are probably confusing James with the Apostle Thomas, who was called the twin.

He was believed to be the son of Joseph because no one learned of the virgin birth until after Christ's resurrection and ascension.

Mary's virgin birth was hidden from the world until the spread of the Gospel.

No. As to being "the brother of the Lord" I am definitely referring to James the Less, James the Just, Apostle James the son of Alphaeus - same person. Where I read that he (or another) looked like Jesus (or stated vice versa) I cannot say. But he is singularly referred by name as "the brother of the Lord".

In society he was Joseph's son. Even with the Incarnation considered, he was the adopted son of Joseph, and therefore his son in human society.

Jesus' virgin birth (birth of/from a virgin) is given in the Gospels. That is very early. So early, that if it were disputed, there would be 3 centuries before the First Ecumenical Council in which an abundant wealth of objections would have time to accumulate. That didn't happen. The Nicene Creed from that council stated the mainline Christian view of the Incarnation.

And to add two things. Mary was in the background in the Gospels with the exception of the Incarnation where she accepted her role, and at the marriage at Cana, where she asked Jesus to help the host and provide wine for the party so that the host wasn't embarrassed. The other were mentions of her presence here or there. But there is plenty of tradition that she was revered by the Faithful, even while at Ephesus. If she was to be ridiculed for a bogus virgin birth story, again there was ample opportunity. Ephesus, the main center for Artemis worship, was thoroughly pagan.

James the Less/Just was prominent in Jerusalem (the church) even while Peter was still in Jerusalem. The wiki article is fairly lengthy. My conclusion is that most likely he is Joseph's son by a prior wife. Even though he is listed first in the lists of brothers, I think he was likely the youngest son of Joseph, perhaps the youngest child. If Joseph was old when he was betrothed to Mary (vice versa), and James lived thirty years after Jesus who was 33? when he died, then it fits age-wise if James is the youngest. Else, he was 90 + years old when he was thrown from a tower and bashed in the head in 62 AD/CE.

James, brother of Jesus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Sabertooth]

It seems farfetched that the Holy Spirit would use some "ideal" mystical sperm - the "I cannot believe its not sperm" sperm kind - when Joseph's DNA is readily available, and ties Jesus to Adam even more closely.

Adam & Eve came into being without sperm.
Why would that be unacceptable for the "second" Adam...?

 

[Diamond7]

Adam & Eve came into being without sperm.
Why would that be unacceptable for the "second" Adam...?

Paul talks about this. The first Adam women comes from man. The second Adam man comes from women.

 

[FireDragon76]

BTW, I use "man" here rather than "human" because "human" involves a number of philosophical issues that are not germane in many ways.

The philosophical issues are not secondary. According to Nicene orthodoxy, God assumes the totality of our human nature in our salvation.

 

[cradleGO]

Adam & Eve came into being without sperm.
Why would that be unacceptable for the "second" Adam...?

I am suggesting a theory that Joseph's shed DNA was a reasonable choice for the male component of Jesus' conception, which is within our understanding of human biology. So, that component should ideally link Jesus with the Hebrew people. While Mary's ovum does that, having Joseph [passive] contribution enhances that linkage.

Could the Holy Spirit have prepared the male component without any tie to Joseph? Yes. But in that Jesus was the child of Mary, it seems to me that a fully human based component would be better - more "symmetrical".

As to Eve, the mechanism is a mystery but by drawing from Adam, who has an X (female) chromosome (men have an X and a Y chromosome), the process needn't be fully from scratch. Adam is another situation entirely. I don't want to pursue that now.

Edit: Thinking about it, of course parallels are well known, but from a DNA perspective there is another. Mary and Eve are more earthbound, while Adam and Jesus are more mystical in their creation.

 

[RDKirk]

The philosophical issues are not secondary. According to Nicene orthodoxy, God assumes the totality of our human nature in our salvation.

Philosophy is a creation of men. Greek philosophy is not Hindu philosophy which is not Muslim philosophy which is not Buddhist philosophy. All of them have different concepts of the nature of man and the characteristics of good and evil.

 

[Diamond7]

Adam & Eve came into being without sperm.
Why would that be unacceptable for the "second" Adam...?

We do not know for sure that Adam and Eve were a supernatural creation. We just know they were real people that lived 6,000 years ago and they were the common ancestor for the Hebrew people today. In science the oldest male common ancestor goes back before the oldest female.

 

[Qubit]

Adam & Eve came into being without sperm.

Actually, they did.

Why would that be unacceptable for the "second" Adam...?

Second Adam? Who is that?

Scripture teaches that Jesus is the Last Adam, so it is not him that you are referring to.

 

[Qubit]

We do not know for sure that Adam and Eve were a supernatural creation.

My Bible teaches that they were 'for sure' created supernaturally.

I believe what my Bible teaches.

 

[FireDragon76]

Philosophy is a creation of men. Greek philosophy is not Hindu philosophy which is not Muslim philosophy which is not Buddhist philosophy. All of them have different concepts of the nature of man and the characteristics of good and evil.

Humanity in traditional Christian anthropology is the union of spirit and flesh, in other words, biology, in the form of a rational soul.

I'm not appealing to something inconsequential. The more extraordinary that we conceive of the origins of Jesus' humanity, the more it does violence to the notion of our own salvation.

 

[Qubit]

It is impossible to put the biblical account into scientific investigation.

I beg to differ. Much has been learned in the last few decades.

For example, it is now confirmed that the Tabernacles and Temples in the Bible are scale models of Eukaryotic Cells. This has profound implications, for obvious reasons.

The various Organelles in the Cell are a perfect match for the Temple furnishings...

• The Most Holy Place represents the Nucleus.
• The Ark of the Covenant represents the Nucleolus.
• The Menorah represents Mitochondrial DNA.
• The Table of Shewbread represents the Golgi Apparatus.
• The Ark Cherubim represent DNA.
• The larger Olive Tree Cherubim represent Chromatids.
• Etc.

Note that these are not 'fringe theories'. This is what God has been trying to show people for thousands of years now.

Here is the most important part...

On Yom Kippur, the Temples switch roles to being representative of an Ovum. The High Priest represents the Holy Ghost that carries the Seed (DNA) to fertilize the Egg...

Since the Temple represented the flesh of Jesus, we know exactly who's Temple Body is contained in the Zygote once it is fertilized...

Hebrews 10:20
"By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh"

And since the OP of this thread is all about figuring out how Mary was fertilized, all we need to do is understand how the various rituals of Yom Kippur relate to the Ovum fertilization process...

Leviticus 4:6
"And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood seven times before the LORD, before the vail of the sanctuary."

The above verse is a picture of Genetic Engineering. The Blood of the Bullock represents the Seed/DNA of the Mother. The Blood of the Goat represents the Seed/DNA of the Father. When combined on the Ark Nucleolus, fertilization takes place...

The reason it is 'seven times' is because seven is the element Nitrogen...

It has 'seven eyes' or seven Electrons. Nitrogenous Bases are the Stone with Seven Eyes as well as the Lamb with Seven Eyes...

The word (Genome) was made flesh. Nitrogen is fertilizer. God has made it so that even the most ignorant can understand, or so I am assuming?

The Two Witnesses are the two Olive Trees next to the Ark...

They represent Chromatids. When joined, they form a Chromosome...

The Cross Jesus was crucified on literally represents the Moment of Conception when the Chromatids of the Mother and Father join to fertilize the Egg.

Note that 'Chroma' is the Rainbow...

"The word chromosome comes from the Greek χρῶμα (chroma, "colour") and σῶμα (soma, "body"), describing their strong staining by particular dyes."

Chromosome - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Anyhow...

The bottom line is that *both* the Seed of the Mother *and* the Seed of the Father are Genetically Engineered ahead of time in an exact and precise manner. In other words, whatever DNA Mary had was manipulated and rewritten to match the Genome required to conceive Jesus.

Again, the process is described in detail in the Bible. I am just showing the basics.

I get the fact that OP belongs to a denomination that elevates Mary to something that the Bible does not teach or promote. Because of this, OP will never be able to comprehend what I have posted. He already dismissed the video I made showing how all of this works. Some folks are simply not ready for such profound information unfortunately.

Thus, this information is for those that are not 'told what to think' according to 'tradition' and dogma. I left the Catholic Church for this very reason. I am no longer bound by their false ideologies.

 

[Diamond7]

My Bible teaches that they were 'for sure' created supernaturally.

That is possible but the DNA evidence does not support your claim. So you have to ignore the evidence that God gives us. Other than of course everything is a miracle and all of creation brings praise, honor and glory to God. He is amazing and beyond our ability to understand. Do you think maybe this is beyond your ability to be able to understand? Because if you have it all figured out then I do have some questions for you.