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!
See 138, by the grace of God, + I am off to sleep.
“So Jesus was not attached to Mary via umbilical cord.”
What the heck does that have to do with DNA donation? I want you to put in quotation marks in your response to me how I even came close to saying that....
Let me explain surrogacy to you, the surrogate mother carries the child without donating any DNA to the child. It happens all the time and the fetus is able to be implanted by man, so with that being said I just don’t think the LORD GOD would have any problems with creating a surrogate mother.
“Also, you know for a fact that one of Mary’s ovum was not used.”
Can you read Scripture... oh wait you couldn’t understand what I put in simple English, never mind.
“These “secret things” along with the status of Mary’s virginity after the birth of Jesus are non-sequiturs.”
Jesus had brothers and sisters a common read of the Scriptures is clear, but you rc’s never let the truth of Scriptures steer you to God.
Mark 6:3-4, paying attention especially to v.4 “His own relatives and household” this eliminates the spiritual brothers and sisters.
John 2:12
After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother and His brothers and His disciples; and they stayed there a few days.
Becasue the Scripture should have read His mother and His brothers and His brother, yeah right.
John 7:39
3 Therefore His brothers said to Him, “Leave here and go into Judea, so that Your disciples also may see Your works which You are doing.
Again read that Scripture it clearly speaks of brothers of the flesh.
Mark 6
3“Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?” And they took offense at Him. 4Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and among his own relatives and in his own household.”
***Even Jesus states that this was His relatives.
It’s very clear that Jesus of Nazareth had brothers and sisters of the flesh.
“Eve was the second human and she had no mother and was not conceived via sexual union!”
Excellent point
“Biology.”
Can the world’s biology or yours raise someone that’s been dead for three days???
Can your biology transport someone to another realm?
Can your biology feed 5,000-20,000 people with a few loafs of bread and a couple small fish?
You are comparing what we know as puny finite human rules/biology to GOD’s infinite abilities.
Quit putting our GOD into your little box.
Sheesh....I had to go help the neighbor.... hah! A good deed! And you know what St. Paul told those pagan Romans! .....
5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
So I’m kinda tired.... I thought this science was amazing....I’m gonna dig deeper into it....Yes we know....There are no verses concerning Joseph, just as there are no verses concerning The Trinity, and no verses that validate justification by faith alone as well.
You also cannot prove a 12 year old Jesus in the Temple had any siblings..... you cannot prove Joseph was a young virile studly guy, you cannot prove he was not previously married or a previous father....... We do know Joseph was out of the picture early.....And no one can know why......
We do know Joseph and Mary were NOT your ordinary couple. Unless angels visiting you is ho-hum Kind of thing for ya. We DO KNOW angels had visited them on multiple occasions, and can assume the Angels would not have just left them alone after warning them to go to Eygypt and then to come back. If Elizabeth knew Mary was the “Mother of my Lord” then so did Joseph.Talk about killing a sex drive. Then of course we have Jesus disregarding Jewish law and giving Mary to John from the cross.....and making John take Mary as his Mother.....which I am sure Jesus “ siblings” Would have liked to have had a say in that...... You Can’t give your mother to someone else..... spin that one from Christ on the Cross....
your faith in the miraculous is so limiting... 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....
Today, the most commonly accepted view is that they were Jesus’ cousins. Of the four “brethren” who are named in the Gospels, consider only James; similar reasoning can be used for the other three. We know that James the younger’s mother was named Mary. Look at the descriptions of the women standing beneath the cross: “among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee” (Matt. 27:56); “There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome” (Mark 15:40).
Then look at what John says: “But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene” (John 19:25). If we compare these parallel accounts of the scene of the crucifixion, we see that the mother of James and Joseph must be the wife of Clopas.
An argument against this, though, is that James is elsewhere (Matt. 10:3) described as the son of Alphaeus, which would mean this Mary, whoever she was, was the wife of both Clopas and Alphaeus. But Alphaeus and Clopas are the same person, since the Aramaic name for Alphaeus could be rendered in Greek either as Alphaeus or as Clopas. Another possibility is that Alphaeus took a Greek name similar to his Jewish name, the way that Saul took the name Paul.
So it’s probable that James the younger is the son of Mary and Clopas. The second-century historian Hegesippus explains that Clopas was the brother of Joseph, the foster-father of Jesus. James would thus be Joseph’s nephew and a cousin of Jesus, who was Joseph’s putative son.
This identification of the “brethren of the Lord” as Jesus’ first cousins is open to legitimate question, but our inability to determine for certain their exact status strictly on the basis of the biblical evidence (or lack of it) says nothing at all about the main point, which is that the Bible demonstrates that they were not the Blessed Virgin Mary’s children. Catholic Answers.
Yes. It’s called mitochondrial DNA
You’ve got it backwards. Mary was buried with her DNA not Jesus.
And the ONLY child in human history, who was born, specifically to die. 🤗
What’s wrong with that?
I am not sure, but maybe it would blow the theory of her demigoddess status out of the water.
I looked at the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of worship. 👍
That wouldn’t be perchance be Jeconiah, would it? 😁 I saw a Bible teacher discuss the curse, and how Satan must have thought he had God over a barrel, because of the curse. Then he said he could imagine God telling His angels, “watch this.” Maybe Satan did not anticipate Mary and the virgin birth.
For him, it’s always “dust in the mouth.” The lake of fire, will be the ultimate “dust in the mouth.” 👍
The Virgin birth. 👍👍👍
Isn’t that, otherwise known as necromancy? It’s evil. 😁
Interesting idea. Since we know that the siblings of Jesus, the children of Mary and Joseph, didn’t believe in Jesus while He was with them. I think they believed in Him later, as James and Jude (Jesus’ brothers) wrote books in the New Testament.
Who knows for sure, but it’s possible that Mary didn’t believe in Jesus (to the saving of the soul) either, till after the resurrection. She was with the disciples after the resurrection, but we simply don’t know at what point she became a born again, truly saved sinner.
The thing that has always left a bad taste in my mouth, is when she and her kids were outside, to speak to him. About what, I don’t know, but it just didn’t look good to me. Were they trying to to get him to stop doing his ministry, since they thought He was putting the entire family at risk? I have no idea, but it is interesting. 👍😁
Iirc women also carry genetic material left from semen
In case you hadn't noticed, God is in the business of using ordinary, ho-hum kind of people.
God is no respecter of persons, as that is a sin and Catholicism elevating people and then claiming God is using them because they are so *special* makes Him that.
We DO KNOW angels had visited them on multiple occasions, and can assume the Angels would not have just left them alone after warning them to go to Eygypt and then to come back.
Assuming is dangerous.
An angel only visited Mary ONCE, and Joseph a couple times. Does that make Joseph more special than Mary?
If Elizabeth knew Mary was the “Mother of my Lord” then so did Joseph.Talk about killing a sex drive.
Matthew 1:18-25 Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly.
But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (which means, God with us). When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.
God told him to take Mary AS HIS WIFE. That comes with certain responsibilities and privileges.
And Scripture tells us he waited until after the birth of Jesus to have sex with her. Again, the question arises, what's the big deal with Mary and Joseph having a normal marriage and relations and having other children as a result?
Then of course we have Jesus disregarding Jewish law and giving Mary to John from the cross.....and making John take Mary as his Mother.....which I am sure Jesus “ siblings” Would have liked to have had a say in that...... You Can’t give your mother to someone else..... spin that one from Christ on the Cross....
There's no record of His brothers being at the cross. They weren't there or I'm sure He would have done it. John was.
Also, show me in the Law where it's required that the firstborn son pass on the care of his parents to a sibling. I've missed that in my reading of the OT.
Today, the most commonly accepted view is that they were Jesus’ cousins.
No, not most commonly held view. The most pushed Catholic talking point.
This identification of the “brethren of the Lord” as Jesus’ first cousins is open to legitimate question, but our inability to determine for certain their exact status strictly on the basis of the biblical evidence (or lack of it) says nothing at all about the main point, which is that the Bible demonstrates that they were not the Blessed Virgin Mary’s children. Catholic Answers.
So they are unable to determine the siblings exact status but then go on to definitively state that "the Bible demonstrates that they were not the Blessed Virgin Mary’s children"????
Yeah, right.
Scripture demonstrates no such thing. Catholics only wish it were so.
And again, what's the big deal with Mary not being perpetually virgin and having other children?
How does that detract from either her or Jesus?
I dunno.
It might kill the Catholic religion’s *sex is bad* mentality.
Yes, you are correct.
I could not remember the name.
Well...
Meaning you were acting more like an evangelical than those who Rome overall manifestly considers to be members in life and in death:
Religious Practices, by Denomination
| A. attend church | B. read Bible | C. pray to God | D. attend Sun sch | E. small group | F. church volunteer | G. donate money | H. share faith | H. Sample size | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| all adults | 43% | 38% | 82% | 16% | 15% | 16% | 18% | 24% | 6038 | |
| Adventist | 47 | 49 | 79 | 18 | 27 | 16 | 16 | 26 | 89 | |
| Assembly of God | 69 | 66 | 93 | 35 | 29 | 30 | 22 | 61 | 94 | |
| Baptist (any type) | 50 | 55 | 92 | 30 | 22 | 19 | 20 | 43 | 1035 | |
| Catholics | 48 | 23 | 88 | 6 | 8 | 12 | 13 | 10 | 1358 | |
| Church of Christ | 58 | 53 | 92 | 37 | 28 | 22 | 29 | 35 | 118 | |
| Episcopal | 30 | 30 | 85 | 11 | 13 | 19 | 17 | 14 | 112 | |
| Lutheran (any type) | 43 | 32 | 84 | 13 | 13 | 19 | 21 | 21 | 287 | |
| Methodist (any) | 49 | 43 | 90 | 18 | 15 | 19 | 23 | 20 | 392 | |
| Mormon/Latter Day Saints | 71 | 67 | 95 | 62 | 27 | 40 | 24 | 26 | 86 | |
| Christian non-denominational | 61 | 66 | 94 | 21 | 32 | 22 | 26 | 57 | 321 | |
| Pentecostal/Foursquare | 66 | 75 | 97 | 36 | 37 | 25 | 27 | 61 | 124 | |
| Presbyterian (any) | 49 | 48 | 89 | 17 | 18 | 26 | 17 | 23 | 192 | - https://www.barna.com/research/protestants-catholics-and-mormons-reflect-diverse-levels-of-religious-activity/ (bg color changed by me for visiblity) |
Volunteer church work (during past 7 days): Assemblies of God were highest at 30%, with the lowest going to Catholics at 12%. ^
Donating Money (during the last month): Church of Christ churches were the highest at 29%, with Catholics being the lowest at 12% ^
American evangelicals gave four times as much money, per person, to churches as did all other church donors in 2001. 88 percent of evangelicals and 73 percent of all Protestants donated to churches. John Ronsvalle and Sylvia Ronsvalle, The State of Church Giving through 2004: Will We Will? 16th ed. (Champaign, Ill.: Empty Tomb, 2006),12. http://www.generousgiving.org/stats#
Data from a variety of researchers indicates that Catholics give one-third to one-half the portion of income that Protestants give. http://www.emptytomb.org/cathgiv.html
A Catholic survey reports that 4 percent of US Catholics described themselves as “very” involved in parish or religious activities other than attending Mass, and 11% as “somewhat involved, and 64% as “not involved at all.” Among weekly (or more) attendees (approx 22% of adult Catholics), 13% were very” involved, 29% “somewhat involved and 25% not involved at all.” http://cara.georgetown.edu/CARAServices/FRStats/devotionpractice.pdf
More more , by the grace of God.
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.