Replies

So, then, Christ is a product of divine and human "genetics?" You are actually suggesting that Mary's DNA (halpoid ovum) genetically fused with the "genetic equivalent" of a divine male [?] DNA (divine "sperm," a "haploid") to produce a mixture of divine and human, a demigod!

To some extent, yeah, that's what I'm suggesting. But without the fun part. :) As I said before, the only thing we are told in scriptures about His appearance is that it was nothing out of the ordinary. Therefore I conclude that the male DNA within Him did not make Him to "appear" to be a perfect male "specimen".

I've seen you mention this "demigod" thing a few times, but I don't think I get it. A demigod is not 100% God. No one is saying that. Christ was 100% God. God made Mary's DNA in the first place, so what difference does it make, for these purposes, whether He used Mary's DNA or if He just went into the lab and manufactured some other person's DNA, not related to Mary? OR, is your contention that the blood Jesus spilled was not human blood? Ah, is this it?

It is rather strange to me that those who insist that Mary is the "Mother of God" (capital M) are actually arguing that she is not really the mother of Jesus in the genetic sense. Never in my life had I ever thought that Jesus was not genetically related to Mary. While it is true that God could have created an embryo in the womb of Mary with no genetic attachment to her, but then that would not have fulfilled the scripture. The only way the scriptures could be fulfilled is if Jesus were an actual blood relation to Abraham and David.

But then our Catholic friends don't take scripture literally, so why would they take any of the prophecies literally. They are not bound by scripture, they are bound by their catechism. In that sense it is a waste of time to argue doctrine with them. They are "right" because some committee tells them what to think and any deviation is heresy. Scripture is not merely secondary to them, it is irrelevant. There is no need to think. The thinking has been done.

Kosta to FK: You are actually suggesting that Mary's DNA (haploid ovum) genetically fused with the "genetic equivalent" of a divine male [?] DNA (divine "sperm," a "haploid") to produce a mixture of divine and human, a demigod!

FK to Kosta: To some extent, yeah, that's what I'm suggesting. But without the fun part. :)

Thank you FK. You, are telling me that Christ is a "mixture" of divine and human, correct?

As I said before, the only thing we are told in scriptures about His appearance is that it was nothing out of the ordinary

Hmmm. The usual "stuff" but "without the fun part," right?

Therefore I conclude that the male DNA within Him did not make Him to "appear" to be a perfect male "specimen"

Imperfect man?

I've seen you mention this "demigod" thing a few times, but I don't think I get it

That's obvious.

Christ [sic] was 100% God

Was? (P-Marlowe, will you please note the tense here. It seems to be something you are sensitive to.) But, FK, you stated above that after Incarnation He is a "mixture" of divine and human. Are you saying He "was 100% God" until Incarnation but then became a "mixture" of 100% God and 100% human?

God made Mary's DNA in the first place, so what difference does it make, for these purposes, whether He used Mary's DNA or if He just went into the lab and manufactured some other person's DNA, not related to Mary?

I guess He could have used clay too. It's been done before.

OR, is your contention that the blood Jesus spilled was not human blood? Ah, is this it?

So far, what you are telling me is not even close to what Chistiany taught and still teaches. To summarize: you are telling me (1) that Christ is a mixture of divine and human "genes," (2) that Incarnation is perfectly ordinary "stuff" except "without the fun part," (3) that Jesus Christ is not a perfect male "specimen," (4) that Christ was a 100% God and (5) that Mary "DNA" was as good as anyone else's.

And after all that you ask me if it is my "contention that the blood Jesus spilled was not human blood!"

I believe that the concept of essence (nature) is not clear in your theology, FK.

The incarnation was a miracle. People are trying to explain it like it is not. It is not difficult to imagine God placing a baby in Mary's womb that is just His own creation without her genetics. It isn't difficult to see that He placed a baby in her womb that contained all of her genetics. What they have trouble seeing and are therefore rejecting is the truth that Mary's genetics fused with the divine equivalent of DNA to the point that Jesus was NOT half man half God; but, rather, He was all man all God 100% of each in one person.

Folks THIS IS A MIRACLE and as the Angel said, NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE with God. Jesus had to be 100% human and carry Mary's genetics, otherwise God is a liar and prophecy wasn't fulfilled. He also had to be 100% God. The only difference here from the way births normally happen is that Jesus did not START being God at conception. He brought His Godhood with Him and it was eternally pre-existent to Mary. Somehow, true God, the second peron of the Trinity, FUSED with True man and was yet one unified person.

THIS IS UNEXPLAINABLE in human terms. But, by faith we know that it occurred.

Mary was not an incubator. Mary was the biological mother of Jesus the Christ who contributed her human DNA to his person. He as God ALWAYS existed. Mary did not contribute to His deity. Yet He fused with humanity and became one person. What an amazing God we serve!