Do not forget, Heb 2:17 - Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
JESUS body has received No DNA from Mary.
- Thread starter Eliyahu
- Start date
ditto
Well, males can't give birth...so 'Abraham begat' can't mean that Abraham gave birth. It means, rather, 'proceeds from'. The Son proceeds from the Father. Jhn 8:42 - Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
You are WRONG! Ask Google or ChatGPT.
Can the conception be done by a surrogate mother? Yes!
Yes, conception and pregnancy can be achieved through a surrogate mother. [1]
How Surrogacy Works
- Gestational surrogacy: Doctors create an embryo in a lab using in vitro fertilization (IVF) with eggs and sperm from the intended parents or donors, then transfer it into the surrogate's uterus. The surrogate has no genetic tie to the baby
Yes, a surrogate mother can conceive a baby from an embryo created by another couple. This occurs in gestational surrogacy, where an embryo formed via in vitro fertilization (IVF) is transferred to the surrogate’s uterus. The egg and sperm used to create the embryo typically come from the intended parents or donors, meaning the surrogate has no genetic connection to the child.
>>>>> Fertilization is done only between Egg and Sperm
Conception and Fertilization are totally different!!!! Even if Bible say Mary conceived 100 times, it doesn't guarantee that Mary's ovum was used for Body of Jesus.
You are beating what I never claimed! There was no fertilization by the ovum of Mary! That's what I insist!
This is why Mt 1:20 says the one BORN in her is by the Holy Spirit. Fertilization was unnecessary for the body of Jesus as He came into her as the perfect human being! Jesus was BORN already on the uterus of Mary before His coming out of Mary!
You are dividing God the Son between Divinity and Humanity. So, Jesus didn't have Humanity before Mary was born?
Your Mary is the Creator of Humanity of Jesus?
Is your God headless? God the Son had His own body~! Your Jesus may start to exist with His body only after Mary,
but my Jesus had everything from Eternity!
Read Genesis 1:27 in Hebrew:
וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָם׃
Likeness wasn't ignored. God created Adam in His likeness, In His likeness God created him
Whose likeness was used for molding Adam? You never answer my question
Word Himself was the Creator and Word Himself could create the body!
Don't think the Word as the human word.
Word Himself had the body, Life, and the Light before the sun was created (John 8:12).
If the Word became a flesh, then nothing from Mary was used for the flesh of Jesus, right?
If the part of Mary like ovum became flesh, then it's opposite to < Word became a Flesh> right?
Word became Flesh means < No Flesh was involved in the formation of the body of Jesus>
If the body of Mary became Flesh of Jesus, the Flesh became Flesh.
But Bible says Word became Flesh, no flesh of Mary was involved!
If you claim Word and Flesh of Mary became Flesh, you are claiming < Word+Flesh became Flesh> which is untrue and different from the Bible, right?
You may have technically avoided my questions. Genesis 18:1-16. Jehovah fully had a body and ate the meals.
Which Godhead was He?
Jesus came down from the Heaven ( John 8:38) Did Mary come down from the Heaven?
You claim the new brain formed by the ovum of Mary can remember the experience with Abraham which the new brain had never experienced before. If you claim such argument, I cannot change your reasoning. Go ahead with your belief! I don't force anyone to believe my discovery and thoughts here.
Eliyahu
Last edited:
Anthony Pritchard
Well-Known Member
Excellent observation!
Anthony Pritchard
Well-Known Member
You are confusing conception with gestation, and your argument does not follow either Scripture or basic biology. A surrogate mother does not “conceive” the child. She gestates the child. Conception happens at fertilization, not implantation. You are confusing two different biological events and then trying to use an appeal to authority to cover the mistake. The biological reality is that a genetically distinct, living organism is formed at the moment of fertilization. Reclassifying "conception" to mean implantation changes clinical terminology, but it does not change the physical, underlying biological event that took place days earlier. So I asked google your question, and here is the answer: a surrogate mother gestates the pregnancy rather than providing the egg for conception.
Last edited:
Jesus was exactly the same as all the other people of Adam's race as He had the same body as the body of Adam before the Fall.
But Jesus had no sin in Him while His brethren had sin. Death passed upon His brethren ( Romans 5:12) but no death was passed upon Jesus. If He had death factors in Him, He couldn't say < I am the way, the truth, the LIFE>
Eliyahu
Anthony Pritchard
Well-Known Member
You say Jesus was “exactly the same as all the other people of Adam’s race as as He had the same body as the body of Adam before the Fall” and then immediately say Jesus was not the same because He had no sin.
Those two statements cannot coexist. They cancel each other out and you appear oblivious to your own contradiction.
I have to apologize. You are right. I made a rookie mistake and didn't notice that my search engine was saying "verses" instead of "times."
Having said that, your Christological error is much, much worse. All orthodox churches have held to the hypostatic union doctrine of Christ for over 1600 years, and most before that, before the heresies of the 19th century. The hypostatic union says that Jesus is 100% human and 100% God. You are making a terrible error with your imaginative Christology.
Upto 1950, all the theologians didn't have the right Life Science.
Therefore we have to review this matter newly in 21st century because there was not so much clear discussions during 1950-2000.
I don't deny Virgin Birth, don't deny the Deity of Jesus, don't deny Trinity, don't deny Second Coming of Jesus, don't deny Word became Flesh. I believe Jesus was 100% human and 100% God
1) Do you believe Death passed upon Mary according to Romans 5:12?
2) Do you believe Death passed upon Jesus as well? or Do you believe Death didn't pass upon Jesus?
3) Do you believe 50% of body and character of Jesus resemble Mary and 50% God?
4) Do you believe Word became Flesh? ( John 1:14) or Flesh became Flesh?
I hope you can answer all
Eliyahu
Last edited:
37818
Well-Known Member
Not.
Eliyahu, is there a point to all this? What is your motivation?
Is it that you're single-handedly trying to change a basic doctrine of faith?
Jesus was conceived in Mary by the working of the Holy Spirit. She was His MOTHER,
not some "surrogate" or glorified incubation chamber. He grew in her womb just like
an human baby would, including His brain, and was born in the same manner as any
human baby.
He was fully human, and fully God. Trying to analyze how God did it is a complete waste
of time...how He did it is God's business.
I mean no disrespect, but it appears to me that the devil has you chasing your own tail.
Is it that you're single-handedly trying to change a basic doctrine of faith?
Jesus was conceived in Mary by the working of the Holy Spirit. She was His MOTHER,
not some "surrogate" or glorified incubation chamber. He grew in her womb just like
an human baby would, including His brain, and was born in the same manner as any
human baby.
He was fully human, and fully God. Trying to analyze how God did it is a complete waste
of time...how He did it is God's business.
I mean no disrespect, but it appears to me that the devil has you chasing your own tail.
Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; - Romans 1:3
This proves to me that genetics from Mary was also used in the creation of the Christ. Otherwise he is no seed of David.
This proves to me that genetics from Mary was also used in the creation of the Christ. Otherwise he is no seed of David.
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
Even if this is correct, (and it may well be as i am no scientist-perhaps somebody who is can tell us), that makes do difference to the fact that God's word does not say that He placed an already-existing body into Mary's womb.
Surely no fertilisation is done by the ovum, but by the semen. That wasn't so for Mary. When she asked the angel how she, who had never known (had intimate relations with) a man, could bear a Son, she was told that the Holy Spirit would come upon her. Nothing about placing an already existing body into her.
No. "The Word" (as John's gospel refers to Him) became flesh, not "was already flesh."
So why does John say He became flesh, if He had always been flesh?
God's image/likeness. Not physical likeness, but spiritual.
No it isn't. The Word, as John said, was in the beginning with God, and was God. That Word became flesh via Mary. Otherwise, as i said before, if He already had flesh, what need was there for a virgin birth, or indeed any birth?
No. There was no flesh before the Holy Spirit came upon Mary.
God is almighty. He can do anything He wants. Appear in bodily form and do things like eating, before the incarnation? No problem for Him.
Of course she didn't.
No i don't. i said that just as God the Father is said to remember things, yet He has no physical brain, so the Son could remember things from the time before He was incarnate, before He had physical parts.
A very simple way of establishing the two natures of Christ is to look at Mark 4:35-41, the 'Stilling of the Storm.'
The Lord Jesus comes on board the boat, and goes to sleep on a pillow. Why does He go to sleep? For the same reason anyone goes to sleep - He's tired, He's a Man; God does not get tired (Isaiah 40:28). Elsewhere, He is hungry and thirsty; He rejoices in Spirit; twice, He weeps. He was 'in all points tested, as we are, yet without sin.' But God 'cannot be tempted by evil' (James 1:13). Jesus is Man; Man as if He were not God.
But when the disciples come to Him in a panic, he rises up and 'rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, "Peace, be still!"' He does not pray to God to still the storm, He Himself does it. Who can control the elements but God? No one! Jesus is God; God as if He were not Man.
And this is the teaching of the Council of Chalcedon: 'One and the ame Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation, the distinction of the natures being in no way abolished because of the union, but rather the characteristic property of each nature being preserved.......'
The Lord Jesus comes on board the boat, and goes to sleep on a pillow. Why does He go to sleep? For the same reason anyone goes to sleep - He's tired, He's a Man; God does not get tired (Isaiah 40:28). Elsewhere, He is hungry and thirsty; He rejoices in Spirit; twice, He weeps. He was 'in all points tested, as we are, yet without sin.' But God 'cannot be tempted by evil' (James 1:13). Jesus is Man; Man as if He were not God.
But when the disciples come to Him in a panic, he rises up and 'rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, "Peace, be still!"' He does not pray to God to still the storm, He Himself does it. Who can control the elements but God? No one! Jesus is God; God as if He were not Man.
And this is the teaching of the Council of Chalcedon: 'One and the ame Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation, the distinction of the natures being in no way abolished because of the union, but rather the characteristic property of each nature being preserved.......'
Wow. So in your belief system life science trumps the Word of God? Is that it?
Absolutely not. I oppose 100% any effort to use science in developing theology. Science has been proven to be wrong 1000s of times. For centuries scientists told us we had 9 planets in our solar system, but now they tell us that we only have 8! That is the broken reed you are leaning on.
No we don't. We have absolutely zero responsibility as theologians (and I teach theology) to access any "scientific" belief to determine our theology.
That's not really what you've been advocating with all your nonsense about DNA, though I'm sure you will say it is.
Certainly.
Well, duh, He died.
Absolutely not. I've already referenced the hypostatic union doctrine which Christians have believed since the NT was written. Didn't you read what I wrote???
This is a really bizarre question. I believe the Bible with all of my heart, and have taught it for decades. OF COURSE I believe the Word became flesh, since that is what the Bible says. And the Bible never says that "flesh became flesh," so no, I don't believe that. I believe exactly what the Bible says: God the Father is the eternal Father of Jesus, and Mary was the human mother of Jesus. That is the meaning of the Word becoming flesh. That is the meaning of the word "mother." Your doctrine denies that Mary was the mother of Jesus, something the Bible clearly teaches.
Anything else is heresy. Period. End of story.
I have answered your weird questions, but had no obligation to do so. You may now continue to spew your execrable, science-based doctrine on this thread.
Last edited:
Friends, we have no instructions from God in the Bible to go to science for any light on any doctrine whatsoever. Therefore, this whole thing about DNA and Mary and Jesus is barking up the wrong tree, going down the wrong road, shooting at the wrong animal, and any other idiom or metaphor we want to dream up or quote.
I took high school physics in the 1960's, and was enthralled. I loved physics and still do. However, probably 50% of what I learned in that class is now proven to be wrong. There are now millions more galaxies discovered. There is now much more research into black holes, which we still don't understand. I was taught that an atom has only a nucleus, protons and electrons, but now we know there are numerous other elements in an atom. I could go on and on. The only sure thing about science is that any scientific "fact" we know will someday be proven wrong or insufficient to explain God's awesome universe.
Two young college physics students went to a lecture by a noted physicist. As they came out of the lecture one said to the other, "Wow, that was awesome!" The second student said, "What did you like about it?" The first one said, "We now know that everything we've been taught by our physics professor is wrong!"
(Budump bump.)
I took high school physics in the 1960's, and was enthralled. I loved physics and still do. However, probably 50% of what I learned in that class is now proven to be wrong. There are now millions more galaxies discovered. There is now much more research into black holes, which we still don't understand. I was taught that an atom has only a nucleus, protons and electrons, but now we know there are numerous other elements in an atom. I could go on and on. The only sure thing about science is that any scientific "fact" we know will someday be proven wrong or insufficient to explain God's awesome universe.
Two young college physics students went to a lecture by a noted physicist. As they came out of the lecture one said to the other, "Wow, that was awesome!" The second student said, "What did you like about it?" The first one said, "We now know that everything we've been taught by our physics professor is wrong!"
(Budump bump.)Armchair Apologist
Well-Known Member
Wow! this is really getting bizarre and I have checked out of this conversation some time ago!
I brought up the DNA of Jesus in order to defend Jesus's true humanity and point out the fact that a REAL human (which Jesus was - just so we are clear) has 46 (26 pair) chromosomes and therefore has DNA which determines his physical characteristics and so forth. These should be "Captain Obvious" statements for any casual observer right?
Believing that Jesus was truly human means also that Jesus had a human soul/spirit (dichotomy/trichotomy argument notwithstanding) and I guess we could get into all sorts of crazy arguments over the origin of the soul (Trachian or Creation) and how this created soul/spirit of Jesus is also that of the eternal creator of the universe? The scriptures are clear that Jesus grew in wisdom and stature yet we also know that God is immutable and cannot be taught. The two exist simultaneously and inseparably in the person of Christ! How do we explain this? I wouldn't even dare try aside from simply believing that this is truth!
Sometimes you just have to know when to walk away and enjoy a nice cup of coffee right John?
Indeed, this sounds like Jesus inherited Genes from Mary.
περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ τοῦ γενομένου ἐκ σπέρματος Δαβὶδ κατὰ σάρκα
Up to Mary, all generations since David were the Spermatos of David
Out of Mary, Flesh of Jesus came.
Even if Mary had been the surrogate mother, still one can say Jesus came out of the seed of David according to the flesh.
Jesus was the Rock (Tsur) ( 1 Cor 10:4, Gen 49:24, Deut 32:4, 15, 18). The Rock didn't become the flesh.
The Rock didn't suddenly become Jesus Christ, but the Word came out of a woman.
So, the lineage had proven the prophecy was right.
Even if the relationship with was not the biological but the surrogacy it is still the offspring of the woman.
Luke 2:48 support this:
Mary knew Joseph was not His father but says the following:
And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
Mary calls Joseph thy Father, which means Jesus is the son of Joseph!
So, the surrogacy doesn't contradict the Lineage of David.
Eliyahu