-
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!
DNA OF JESUS PART II
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
Born of God; born of Mary.
Christ was true Man and true God. To deny His descent from Mary is the error of Melchiorism.
Christ was true Man and true God. To deny His descent from Mary is the error of Melchiorism.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Being formed, fully human and fully God, in the womb and then born shows descent from Mary. Being the son of Joseph (step father) shows descent from David.
That is how people in the ancient near east would have viewed it.
We shouldn’t apply our modern understanding of “DNA” and other biological science to be imposed upon this first century understanding.
It leads to error, imo.
If God believed the exact, scientific and biological information concerning the incarnation were important, He would have told us.
Perhaps He will give us all a lecture in heaven and explain it.
Peace to you
This I agree with, as Jesus grew in Mary's womb for nine months. Unless Jesus did not have a
belly button (aka: umbilical cord), He drew all of His sustenance from Mary during that time.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Yes He did
Exactly, calling the Blessed Virgin Mary a “surrogate mother” is not an accurate description of what Scripture teaches about her role in the Incarnation.
A surrogate carries a child for someone else. Mary did far more than simply “carry” Jesus. She conceived Him, carried Him in her womb, gave birth to Him, nursed Him, raised Him, and was truly His mother.
The angel Gabriel said:
“You will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus.” Luke 1:31
Notice the language: “conceive in your womb and bear a son.” Mary was not merely providing a womb.
Jesus did not merely pass through Mary as though she were simply a vessel. The eternal Word truly took human flesh from her. Mary gave Him His humanity, while He remained eternally divine.
So let us not reduce motherhood to simply “giving birth.” A mother does not become a mother merely because of the moment of delivery. Mary carried Jesus, gave birth to Him, nursed Him, cared for Him, raised Him, and remained faithfully united to Him—even standing beneath His Cross.
Mary is not a surrogate. She is the Mother of Jesus. And Jesus is God.
Armchair Apologist
Well-Known Member
From a practical standpoint, all DNA comes from God and God is sovereign over the composition of such DNA.
With all that said, 26 of Jesus's chromosomes came from Mary and the other 26 came from God through the supernatural incarnation. The scriptures are clear that "a virgin shall conceive..." meaning that Mary's ovum became a complete zygote of which became God manifest in the flesh. I do not believe that Mary's ovum was fertilized with some divine "sperm" or whatever. God simply had to speak (or decree) the XY chromosomes into existence.
I can appreciate the comments of those saying there shouldn't be so much concern over DNA and that the scriptures do not mention such but the fact of the matter is that the scriptures speak nothing of molecular biology now does it? Does this mean we should just ignore it or do we believe the statement that "all truth is God's truth?" If Jesus's earthly ministry was in this present age, you had better believe that DNA tests would come up whereby Jesus could prove his lineage. I do not believe Jesus would submit himself to such testing though as the destiny of his first coming was the cross and not the throne. But if one were to do so, I believe that his DNA would show a clear familial relationship with the house and lineage of David.
We often look for "Natuiralistic" explanations for supernatural events in the scriptures and such is the foundation for liberal and modernistic thinking. We do not need to explain how God took Adam's rib (having XY chromosomes) to make Eve (having XX chromosomes). What we do know is that God has formulated man out of the dust of the earth and he arranged the molecular composition according to his sovereign will and good pleasure.
With all that said, 26 of Jesus's chromosomes came from Mary and the other 26 came from God through the supernatural incarnation. The scriptures are clear that "a virgin shall conceive..." meaning that Mary's ovum became a complete zygote of which became God manifest in the flesh. I do not believe that Mary's ovum was fertilized with some divine "sperm" or whatever. God simply had to speak (or decree) the XY chromosomes into existence.
I can appreciate the comments of those saying there shouldn't be so much concern over DNA and that the scriptures do not mention such but the fact of the matter is that the scriptures speak nothing of molecular biology now does it? Does this mean we should just ignore it or do we believe the statement that "all truth is God's truth?" If Jesus's earthly ministry was in this present age, you had better believe that DNA tests would come up whereby Jesus could prove his lineage. I do not believe Jesus would submit himself to such testing though as the destiny of his first coming was the cross and not the throne. But if one were to do so, I believe that his DNA would show a clear familial relationship with the house and lineage of David.
We often look for "Natuiralistic" explanations for supernatural events in the scriptures and such is the foundation for liberal and modernistic thinking. We do not need to explain how God took Adam's rib (having XY chromosomes) to make Eve (having XX chromosomes). What we do know is that God has formulated man out of the dust of the earth and he arranged the molecular composition according to his sovereign will and good pleasure.