Posted on 08/26/2020 1:41:57 PM PDT by MurphsLaw
The scientific word is “microchimerism”. It is the transfer of cells from the baby’s body into the mother’s body and the transfer of cells of the mother’s body in the baby’s body. These cells of the baby remain in the mothers’ body after birth. Very interesting indeed when considering the relationship between Jesus and his mother Mary.
The microchimerism website says,
“Microchimerism is the harboring of small numbers of cells that originated in a genetically different individual.
During pregnancy some cells traffic from the mother to the fetus and from the fetus to the mother. Surprisingly, a small number of the mother’s cells persist in her offspring, including into adult life. And a small number of cells from prior pregnancies persist in mothers many years later. It has only recently become apparent that naturally-acquired microchimerism is common in humans.”
(http://www.microchimerism.org)
The new scientific discovery of microchimerism informs us that some of the cells of the God-Man Jesus remained in the body of Mary. At his gestation and after his birth, Jesus left microscopic bits of his own divine cellular being inside his mother. Was Mary then a tabernacle of the Divine? Yes, not only during the pregnancy but also forever after.
Smithsonian Magazine informs us, “This cellular invasion means that mothers carry unique genetic material from their children’s bodies, creating what biologists call a microchimera, named after the legendary beasts made of different animals. The phenomenon is widespread among mammals, and scientists have proposed a number of theories for how it affects the mother, from better wound healing to higher risk of cancer.”
We speak of Mary being the Ark of the New Covenant. The Ark of the Old Covenant in the Old Testament contained 1) the Word of God inscribed on stone, 2) an urn of manna, and 3) Aaron the High Priest’s rod that budded (Heb 9:4).
Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant and in her womb was 1) the Word of God inscribed on flesh, 2) the real bread which came down from heaven, and 3) the real and ultimate, eternal High Priest.
But science now informs us that Mary was the Ark of the Covenant that carried God Himself not only for nine months but for the remainder of her existence. Mary was — and indeed still is — the Ark of the New Covenant and the repository of the Divine.
What other woman has this relationship with God in the flesh? She is the beloved daughter of the Father, the chosen mother of the Son, and the chaste spouse of the Holy Spirit. What other woman has such a relationship with the Trinity?
And now that science has discovered microchimerism, we realize now that May is perpetually the tabernacle of the Divine. As a Protestant, I thought Mary was non-essential and not important. Catholics made too big a deal of Mary. Boy, was I wrong. I love being a Catholic!
Once again you are showing that you do not or will not know, for indeed there are many verses concerning The Trinity, with the Divinity of Christ and of the Spirit which necessitates this, and which Scriptural warrant was the basis for its formulation, and is why "Bible Christians" overall affirm it. You can only wish that Perpetual Marian Virginity (PMV) had anything close to the warrant that necessitates the Triunity of God.
Likewise, contrary to the typical Cath strawman of sola fide, Scripture indeed teaches that justification is by effectual obedience-effecting, regenerating, heart-purifying faith - the faith that is behind works and which are inseparable in effect from it - and as shown you, Luther himself taught that it was only this effectual faith that was salvific as SCripture does:
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. (Acts 10:43-44)
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith [before baptism]. (Acts 15:7-9)
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; (Titus 3:5)
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:8-10)
Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: (Romans 4:4-11)
To which James 2 must be reconciled by understanding what is being argued.
You also cannot prove a 12 year old Jesus in the Temple had any siblings.....
which status is an exception to the norm, as is an non-consummated marriage, and is NOT to be assumed unless, as in the case of the virgin birth, this is what is revealed in Scripture.
you cannot prove Joseph was a young virile studly guy,
But which would be the norm, and is to be assumed.
you cannot prove he was not previously married or a previous father.......
Which need not to be proved, and if "brothers" refers to Joseph's sons by an earlier marriage, not Jesus but Joseph's firstborn then he would have been legal heir to David's throne.
We do know Joseph was out of the picture early.....And no one can know why.....
Apparently, and which is not much of an exception to the norm after about 30 years of marriage.
We do know Joseph and Mary were NOT your ordinary couple.
Because the Holy Spirit characteristically reveals notable exceptions to the norm even among lesser persons, as has been shown.
If Elizabeth knew Mary was the “Mother of my Lord” then so did Joseph.Talk about killing a sex drive
Another assumption. There was nothing commanded or inferred as to Joseph and Mary not consummating their marriage, which exception to the norm the Holy Spirit does provide in the case of the nonconsummated marriage (presumed in the light of intimacy) btwn David and Abishag (1 Kings 1:4) And in contrast, we have the explicit statement that Joseph "knew her [Mary] not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS." (Matthew 1:25)(Mt. 1:25) Here, true to form, in order for Catholics to argue for an exceeding exception to the norm, they must resort to arguing for another exceedingly rare exception to the norm, that the Greek word for "til" (heōs) does not mean a terminus is inferred. As said and ignored.
Then of course we have Jesus disregarding Jewish law and giving Mary to John from the cross.... You Can’t give your mother to someone else..
What Scriptural Jewish law (not custom) did the Lord disregard? Who say the one who is greater than the Sabbath cannot give His mother to someone else, who unlike His brethren whom John states did not believe on Him in John 7:5, someone who like Mary, was His brother? (Matthew 12:49) In addition, rather than Jesus having no other biological kin being the reason, there is at least two compelling reasons for choosing the "disciple whom Jesus loved" - the so-called "apostle of love," John, to take care of His mother. For John is shown to be the most caring, and the one who would not due early by martyrdom.
your faith in the miraculous is so limiting..
Sophistry. Arguing that because God can do something is not a basis for asserting His did do something, while to deny that that Mary could consummate her marriage and raise other children along with the Son of God (rather than Christ being an only child, which is inconsistent with His experiencing humanity) is what is lacking in faith and reason.
62 Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! Christ can be transfigured with Moses, Isaiah- Rise from the dead.... Ascend into Heaven.... but Joseph has a more important libido to take care of....as the Angels looked on....Now THAT’S some major league pressure right there....
Please! This is inferring the marital relations are unclean, contrary to Scripture, and which angels see all the time, and is an extension of the closeness Joseph had with Mary, rather than she being some sort of untouchable vestal virgin. Angels would expect Josephs and Mary to conform to how God described marriage:
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (Genesis 2:24)
There is not actual warrant for assuming the holy couple did not. Even temple priests did not living in perpetual continence.
the Bible demonstrates that they were not the Blessed Virgin Mary’s children.
No, it does not, much less that Josephs and Mary did not conform to how God described marriage and consummate their sanctified union.
Catholic Answers.
Which explains the sophistry.
Mostly likely the "brethren" wanted to Him out, "For neither did his brethren believe in him." (John 7:5) while Mary wanted to express concern. In any case, the event you reference is a revealing testimony against Mary having the Catholic status in which she is never refused. For given a prime opportunity to exalt her, while Mary "his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him," (Matthew 12:46) rather than cutting things short and going to her in conformation of her presumed compelled Catholic priority of attention, the Holy Spirit of Christ nowhere recorded He even did here, and instead the Lord's response is to equate her will all who do the will of His Father:
But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. (Matthew 12:48-50)
Oh; THIS is gonna be a BIG cat fight thread!!!
Honey; toss TWO bags of extra buttered in the microwave; get us some Dinks; too!
He was not ashamed to call us brothers.
Mormonism
|
Catholicism
|
If this has been around since 1970’s, why is the author of the OP saying it’s a new scientific finding?
General comment: Also, to those who already hold the Catholic Faith, I don’t see why this finding is such a big deal.
But WAIT!!!
Brigham Young, October 9, 1859
Intelligence, Etc.
Remarks by President BRIGHAM YOUNG, delivered in the Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake City, October 9, 1859.
Reported by G. D. Watt
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p.282-91
They succeeded in killing Joseph, but he had finished his work.He was a servant of God, and gave us the Book of Mormon.He said the Bible was right in the main, but, through the translators and others, many precious portions were suppressed, and several other portions were wrongly translated; and now his testimony is in force, for he has sealed it with his blood.As I have frequently told them, no man in this dispensation will enter the courts of heaven, without the approbation of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Jun.Who has made this so?Have I?Have this people?Have the world?No; but the Lord Jehovah has decreed it.If I ever pass into the heavenly courts, it will be by the consent of the Prophet Joseph.If you ever pass through the gates into the Holy City, you will do so upon his certificate that you are worthy to pass.Can you pass without his inspection?No; neither can any person in this dispensation, which is the dispensation of the fulness of times.In this generation, and in all the generations that are to come, everyone will have to undergo the scrutiny of this Prophet.They say that they killed Joseph, and they will yet come with their hats under their arms and bend to him; but what good will it do them, unless they repent?They can come in a certain way and find favor, but will they?
God is my “right hand man.”[8]
(Joseph Smith, in a letter to James Arlington Bennett on November 13, 1843, History of the Church, (Deseret Book, 1975), vol. 6, p. 78.)
"God made Aaron to be the mouth piece for the children of Israel, and He will make me be god to you in His stead, and the Elders to be mouth for me; and if you don’t like it, you must lump it."
Joseph Smith at the LDS Conference on April 8, 1844, History of the Church, vol. 6, pp. 319-320.
"God is in the still small voice. In all these affidavits, indictments, it is all of the devil—all corruption. Come on! ye prosecutors! ye false swearers! All hell, boil over! Ye burning mountains, roll down your lava! for I will come out on the top at last. I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter- day Saints never ran away from me yet."
Joseph Smith, Sunday, May 26, 1844 History of the Church, vol. 6, pp. 408-9.
"We will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring. We will have an endless eternity for this.”
— Joseph Fielding Smith Jr., Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.2, p.48
“As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become.”
Lorenzo Snow, Mormon Prophet and president
"The day will come—and it is not far distant, either—when the name of the Prophet Joseph Smith will be coupled with the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, the Son of God, as his representative, as his agent whom he chose, ordained and set apart to lay anew the foundations of the Church of God in the world, which is indeed the Church of Jesus Christ, possessing all the powers of the gospel, all the rites and privileges, the authority of the Holy Priesthood, and every principle necessary to fit and qualify both the living and the dead to inherit eternal life, and to attain to exaltation in the kingdom of God."[5]
Joseph F. Smith, sixth president of the LDS Church, Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed. [1939], p. 134; as quoted in “Joseph Smith: Restorer of Truth,” Ensign, (Dec. 2003): p. 17.
“Thus those who gain eternal life receive exaltation. . . They are gods.”
(LDS Apostle Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, pg. 237).
(Gordon B. Hinckley, the fifteenth president of the LDS Church, Ensign article entitled “Joseph Smith: Restorer of Truth,” December 2003)
My brothers and sisters, in this bicentennial year of his birth, I should like to speak of our beloved Prophet Joseph Smith. . . . In the 135th section of the Doctrine and Covenants we read the words of John Taylor concerning the Prophet Joseph: “Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it.” [D&C 135: 3]
(Thomas S. Monson, counselor to President Gordon B. Hinckley, the semi-annual LDS Conference in Salt Lake City, 2005)
Try again, Murph
I've heard this; but then WHO is that OLD fella in my mirror?
Which is wise since that testifies to the delusions of Rome which imagines she can proclaim something to be required belief approx. 1700 after it allegedly occurred by fallibly claiming non-existent early testimony but which means she claims to "remember" what early tradition "forgot" to mention.
As Ratzinger stated,
Before Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven was defined, all theological faculties in the world were consulted for their opinion. Our teachers' answer was emphatically negative. What here became evident was the one-sidedness, not only of the historical, but of the historicist method in theology. “Tradition” was identified with what could be proved on the basis of texts. Altaner, the patrologist from Wurzburg…had proven in a scientifically persuasive manner that the doctrine of Mary’s bodily Assumption into heaven was unknown before the 5C; this doctrine, therefore, he argued, could not belong to the “apostolic tradition. And this was his conclusion, which my teachers at Munich shared.
How then can Rome rationalize making belief in the Assumption a binding doctrine? Why, by claiming,
But if you conceive of “tradition” as the living process whereby the Holy Spirit introduces us to the fullness of truth and teaches us how to understand what previously we could still not grasp (cf. Jn 16:12-13), then subsequent “remembering” (cf. Jn 16:4, for instance) can come to recognize what it has not caught sight of previously and was already handed down in the original Word,” J. Ratzinger, Milestones (Ignatius, n.d.), 58-59.
"Caught sight of" means seeing what is not there. Yet the actual basis for the claimed veracity of such decrees as the Assumption is NOT that Scripture substantiates it, but is bases upon the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome (and basically in primary cults).
Thus as asserted by the founder of sophist "Catholic Answers,"
"...the mere fact that the Church teaches the doctrine of the Assumption as definitely true is a guarantee that it is true," -Karl Keating, founder of Catholic Answers; Catholicism and Fundamentalism San Francisco: Ignatius, 1988, p. 275)
For Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined(?) (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares.
-Karl Keating,
FWIW: The notation in my Geneva Bible: “Christ here is called the first borne, because she had never none before, and not in respect of any she had after.”
Ah, good old CatholicAnswers. The website that claims that saved by grace really means saved by works, and that when the ECFs wrote about salvation through faith alone, they REALLY meant saved by works.
As a side note: It’s interesting in the painting of God giving life to Adam they both are depicted having navels; in fact, all paintings of Adam and Eve show them having navels.
On the flip side, Jesus exists outside of space and time meaning past, present, future, untold dimensions, etc... are under His “feet” at all times. The Trinity of three “persons” has layers of internal and external qualities which leads to a complete understanding, self-awareness, and perfect knowledge through those 3 “Persons” in one. All three have different qualities/roles.
Jesus has always existed but also has access during eternity past, present, and future of the current time-line we are “confined” in now. To be fully human you must be grafted with another person. That other person was Mary and her genetic line since all of eternity. And you know what, that genetic line from Mary does not require perfection unless you think humans are perfect. In fact Mary was bestowed Grace of the highest order before our Lord was grafted into her womb and nurtured in that womb by Mary, sharing all kinds of DNA perhaps down through her genetic line.
I think it is shocking audacity for a human to think they could even begin to understand the genetics of the Incarnate Christ. If God wanted us to know this He would have told us. It may be something we never know even in eternity. Certainly it is nothing we need to know
” in fact, all paintings of Adam and Eve show them having navels.”
I can’t say I noticed that, but yes that is interesting. Those same artists are probably the ones that painted Angels as cute little babies with little cute wings, but according to Scriptures nothing could be further from the truth. Angels are mighty warriors of the highest degree 185,000 battle hardened soldiers killed over night by just one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.