Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I'm wondering where Jesus got his DNA from. If his entire human/phsyical DNA came from his virgin mother, he would have been a girl.
It is Jesus the man, like any other human being, must have DNA. As a male, his Y chromosome must come from another male - his father. If his father was not a physical being with DNA, then God must somehow have constructed a male DNA for this purpose. Jesus is said not to have sinned, while normal humans are weak and tend to sin and do evil. That raises the question - if God is able to construct DNA and make a more or less perfect being, why didn't he do that for all of us?
Yes, God can do magic and just make Jesus the way he was, end of story. But the point of the story is exactly that Jesus was a man. He was part God in the sense of Christ being part of it, but Jesus the man started out as a child, had to eat and drink and live a physical human life and experience human suffering and pain. That is the whole point, isn't it? If Jesus the physical man was a magical construct with the shape of a man, but wasn't a man at all, the point of his life and suffering sort of goes away.
So in order for the Jesus concept to work, he had to be 100% human, but with elements of God in addition to that (the magic tricks he did and the fact that he walked after his death). If Jesus wasn't human, one could argue that he didn't really die on the cross, but that the human-shaped "thing" that just looked human, just looked like it died on the cross.
And in order for Jesus to be human, he must have male DNA, and it must come from somewhere. Either from the direct construction of a God who for some reason didn't bother to improve the DNA for the rest of us, or from some other source.
I'm wondering where Jesus got his DNA from. If his entire human/phsyical DNA came from his virgin mother, he would have been a girl.
If Jesus thought that written words are not important and that the Holy Ghost or somehing like that would make his teachings obvious, then it's paradoxical that many people today use the written words in the Bible as their theological guide. It's obvious that the "presence" of the Holy Ghost is not enough to convince people.
Actually, I'm an atheist. I've wondered about this, how religious people and historians view this matter, why not a single written word of Jesus exists.
It is my opinion that the cause is simply that Jesus did not exist. But there are many interesting and fruitful answers in this thread.
If Jesus thought that written words are not important and that the Holy Ghost or somehing like that would make his teachings obvious, then it's paradoxical that many people today use the written words in the Bible as their theological guide. It's obvious that the "presence" of the Holy Ghost is not enough to convince people.
Your argument is rational; and that makes the NT Bible an unauthorized book, written without express authority from Jesus.
Regards
Just like Abraham Lincoln never ever gave anyone permission to write about his assassination.Your argument is rational; and that makes the NT Bible an unauthorized book, written without express authority from Jesus.
Regards
Free will.
It's not paradoxical at all. They lack the knowledge of the heart through Spirit in order to listen with their heart, and so they externalize it. "Tell me what to believe, and tell me why I should believe you", is the modus operandi for all those who are not yet attuned to listening with the spirit. Believer and unbeliever alike.
Your argument is rational; and that makes the NT Bible an unauthorized book, written without express authority from Jesus.
Regards
Indeed. But if one discards the Bible as unauthorized and purely a work of men (no divine inspiration or intent of it being written), then why believe in it?
All historical accounts we have are biased and contain inaccuracies. We don't discard them, we examine them carefully and critically to determine what they can tell us.Indeed. But if one discards the Bible as unauthorized and purely a work of men (no divine inspiration or intent of it being written), then why believe in it?
And if one discards the Bible as possibly fiction, what foundation remains to believe in Christianity? What other more credible sources are there to believe that Jesus lived and died on the cross and then lived again?
fantôme profane;3828252 said:All historical accounts we have are biased and contain inaccuracies. We don't discard them, we examine them carefully and critically to determine what they can tell us.
Sometimes we can even glean a piece of the truth by examining exactly what lies people tell, and how they tell them.
Originally Posted by Windwalker View Post
It's not paradoxical at all. They lack the knowledge of the heart through Spirit in order to listen with their heart, and so they externalize it. "Tell me what to believe, and tell me why I should believe you", is the modus operandi for all those who are not yet attuned to listening with the spirit. Believer and unbeliever alike.
I am sure it is what the Bible is all about which proves to me God does know it!The Creator Of The Universe should have known this.
Why? It's really quite simple. Those that don't know how to listen with the ears of their heart, look to others outside themselves to tell them what to believe. The hope is that when someone is taught the precepts of what to do, that it becomes internalized for them to where they can know listen to their own heart and not have to be told what to think and what to do. Think of it like teaching children. Eventually, you hope they understand for themselves why they should and shouldn't do certain things, and they can be teachers themselves.The Creator Of The Universe should have known this.
Was the son of God illiterate? That's not very impressive.
Everyone was illiterate.
That is to say, only about 3% of the people were literate in the ancient world. Most regular folks were suspicious of writing because it could deprive them of money, land, inheritance, etc. So being literate wouldn't have been impressive, nor would it necessarily had been attractive.
To you, illiteracy is a negative thing, but that's because you live in a society that values literacy, and everyone who is notable or noteworthy is at least literate.
Times change - in the future, everyone might value something else, and you would need to argue that Jesus is a fraud (or whatever) because Jesus doesn't portray the positive qualities of the day.
Indeed. But if one discards the Bible as unauthorized and purely a work of men (no divine inspiration or intent of it being written), then why believe in it?
And if one discards the Bible as possibly fiction, what foundation remains to believe in Christianity? What other more credible sources are there to believe that Jesus lived and died on the cross and then lived again?