- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
20 May 17
Originally posted by chaney3
Where did the required Y chromosome come from in the conception of Jesus, which comes from the human father?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparently God provided whatever He needed to be incarnate as a Man from the womb of Mary.
It is not the year 2017 AD. We know som ...[text shortened]... mming. Its occurrence is rare but existent if there is some higher priority that needs attending to.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by chaney3Apparently God provided whatever He needed to be incarnate as a Man from the womb of Mary.
Where did the required Y chromosome come from in the conception of Jesus, which comes from the human father?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is not the year 2017 AD. We know something about the X and Y Chromosome of which people 2000 years ago probably knew nothing.
If Christ delays perhaps another 1000 years it is possible that what man knows about the X and Y Chromosome will be many times more intricate then what we know today. Perhaps people's speaking of X and Y Chromosomes to a future level of knowledge will sound primitive, backward, un-advanced, maybe even naive.
Though man's level of knowledge grows no increase can make obsolete the revelation that God's mastery over His creation is eternal and infinite.
Forget about how was the X and Y Chromosome provided in the incarnation of God as a man. We don't know where the quarks, neutrinos, Higgs fields, quantum fuctuations and gravity, energy, quantum entanglement, neuons and whatever other undiscovered yet sub-atomic wave / particles when He created heaven and earth.
God certainly does not forbid us to try to find out as much as we can.
And man has discovered a whole lot. The very first line of the revelation informs us that God has the power and authority to call into being the things not being and provide whatever He needs to set in motion His apparatus of His creation.
In system programming I learned that there are some routines IBM called "a higher priority interrupt." That is in the millions of lines of logic at times a special section of logic could execute which had a higher priority to suspend more usual logic to tend to some task of greater overall significance.
A miracle to God is something like a "higher priority interrupt" to system programming. Its occurrence is rare but existent if there is some higher priority that needs attending to.
20 May 17
Originally posted by divegeesterOkay, so you are saying it's a 'Catholic thing' and erroneous.
That is the catholic teaching only and is erroneous, biblically speaking.
The interesting thing in all this is whether or not God impregnated marry with a new fertilised egg, or caused one of her existing eggs to be fertilised. Because if it was an existing egg then the gene for "sinfulness" is carried on the Y chromosome, which is the "male" chromos ...[text shortened]... e embryo development, which is probably in tandem with the X chromosome gene. Who knows. Not me.
For anyone to answer:
Does it say anywhere in the Bible that Mary, Mother of Jesus was sinless? Does the Bible try to imply that Jesus was biologically free from sin, or did humans feel the need to change that narrative centuries later?
And how does all this sinless stuff and chromosome stuff affect the supposed lineage Jesus has with David?
20 May 17
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeWhen I was a kid, my father used to bust my chops, and say:
Add it to the list sir.
😏
"They can fit everything you know into a thimble, and still have plenty of room left".
Lol. 🙂
I don't have a problem admitting that I was blindsided by lack of understanding regarding the immaculate conception.
Also, I catch myself wanting to say immaculate reception, the Franco Harris catch. 🙂
20 May 17
Originally posted by chaney3The bible does indicate Mary was full of grace (forget the passage) which could in turn be argued to indicate she was perfectly sinless and hence worthy of being the mother of Christ.
Okay, so you are saying it's a 'Catholic thing' and erroneous.
For anyone to answer:
Does it say anywhere in the Bible that Mary, Mother of Jesus was sinless? Does the Bible try to imply that Jesus was biologically free from sin, or did humans feel the need to change that narrative centuries later?
And how does all this sinless stuff and chromosome stuff affect the supposed lineage Jesus has with David?
20 May 17
1 edit
Originally posted by chaney3Typo:
Okay, so you are saying it's a 'Catholic thing' and erroneous.
For anyone to answer:
Does it say anywhere in the Bible that Mary, Mother of Jesus was sinless? Does the Bible try to imply that Jesus was biologically free from sin, or did humans feel the need to change that narrative centuries later?
And how does all this sinless stuff and chromosome stuff affect the supposed lineage Jesus has with David?
I meant to write "It is NOW the year 2017 ..." - sonship
20 May 17
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeI completely disagree. How does "being full of grace" in any way imply "sinlessness"?
The bible does indicate Mary was full of grace (forget the passage) which could in turn be argued to indicate she was perfectly sinless and hence worthy of being the mother of Christ.
20 May 17
Originally posted by chaney31) no it doesn't, at all, anywhere.
Does it say anywhere in the Bible that Mary, Mother of Jesus was sinless? Does the Bible try to imply that Jesus was biologically free from sin, or did humans feel the need to change that narrative centuries later?
And how does all this sinless stuff and chromosome stuff affect the supposed lineage Jesus has with David?
2) no it's not implied, it's stated that he was "without sin"
3) the bible doesn't say that humans need to change the nattative. But I think I'm responding to your poor syntax rather than your intended question.
20 May 17
Originally posted by divegeesterPoor syntax?
1) no it doesn't, at all, anywhere.
2) no it's not implied, it's stated that he was "without sin"
3) the bible doesn't say that humans need to change the nattative. But I think I'm responding to your poor syntax rather than your intended question.
You realize that your spelling generally sucks, right?
"Nattative" (sic) is but your recent offering. Why don't you just focus on replying, and leave the English teacher bit alone....okay? Nobody is perfect my friend.
Try not to always leave a jab when you post, and show a little humility.
20 May 17
Originally posted by chaney3Fair comment, accepted.
Poor syntax?
You realize that your spelling generally sucks, right?
"Nattative" (sic) is but your recent offering. Why don't you just focus on replying, and leave the English teacher bit alone....okay? Nobody is perfect my friend.
Try not to always leave a jab when you post, and show a little humility.
20 May 17
Originally posted by divegeester“The angel went to her and said, ‘Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.’” Luke 1:28,
I completely disagree. How does "being full of grace" in any way imply "sinlessness"?
The Greek word translated “highly favored” can be rendered “favored with grace”; thus, according to Catholic dogma, Mary had a superabundance of grace, rendering her sinless, and that’s why God chose her to bear His Son.
www.gotquestions.org/immaculate-conception.html
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeNot sinless as much as forgiven, there is a difference, and since God's grace upon sinners
“The angel went to her and said, ‘Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.’” Luke 1:28,
The Greek word translated “highly favored” can be rendered “favored with grace”; thus, according to Catholic dogma, Mary had a superabundance of grace, rendering her sinless, and that’s why God chose her to bear His Son.
www.gotquestions.org/immaculate-conception.html
is the one of the main theme' of the NT and OT it stands to reason in my opinion. The
family name comes through the father, and all that goes with the family as an inheritance.
I shared with you once before when we were discussing this issue in another context that
in the book of Hebrews it said.
"And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham. For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him."
Credit for actions follow the fathers, there is never a mention of this type of thing through
mothers, at least none that come to my mind. So I think to avoid the sin issue, the father
was the one that required a miracle not the mother, in my opinion.
Hebrews 7:
4 Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.
5 And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:
6 But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.
7 And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better.
8 And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.
9 And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.
10 For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him.
11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
20 May 17
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeI agree that "according to catholic dogma" that is how it is interpreted.
“The angel went to her and said, ‘Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.’” Luke 1:28,
The Greek word translated “highly favored” can be rendered “favored with grace”; thus, according to Catholic dogma, Mary had a superabundance of grace, rendering her sinless, and that’s why God chose her to bear His Son.
www.gotquestions.org/immaculate-conception.html