How did Jesus get his Y chromosome?

Amergin

Well-Known Member
Messages
521
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
North of Antarctica
The Myth story is that Jesus was immaculately conceived (i.e. without filthy mammalian sex.) Mary had no Y chromosomes in her DNA. How did she get the Y chromosome for Jesus when she did not have one?

1. Jesus was a female, raised as a male. (It happens.)

2. Mary was conceived by a human male but her shame hid that fact.

3. At that conception, Mary had a billion to one incidence of one of her X chromosomes mutating into a Y chromosome. The odds were even higher.

4. God used Cosmic Magic that the Holy Spirit used to insert a Y chromosome while removing one X chromosome. The Holy Spirit's real name is David Copperfield who resides in the Andromeda Galaxy.

I joke about this but without intent to slander Jesus. Jesus was a great man who taught morality, compassion, and justice. He did not need deification to be a great man. Superstition overshadowed his great mind.

Amergin
 
I don't think it's appropriate to joke or mock peoples' beliefs.

As far as I know the "immaculate conception" had more to do with Mary being born without "the stain of original sin"....She had parents. Baha'is don't subscribe to "original sin".

Jesus' birth was from Mary a virgin... how this happened is a mystery. Both the Qur'an and the Bible appear to confirm it.

We Baha'is believe Jesus found existence through the Spirit of God.

1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

(King James Bible, Matthew)
 
I don't find this post offensive-- some people might, but those who do would find women wearing trousers offensive....

I opt for option 2: Jesus was conceived by a human male. I do not think shame caused Mary to lie -- I think that the idea of Jesus being born a man, of a woman and another man, diluted the God-like aspect of Christ, and so he was given his "miraculous birth" backstory to make him seem even better and more godly than he was. The council of Nicea decided Jesus was divine, and not human, in, what... about 325 AD? If you look on wikipedia, it tells you that "the council did not decide on Jesus' divine birth", but they did.

He is not the first God I have encountered to have such a miraculous birth -- Buddha, I was told, by opponents of buddhism, was born from sperm discarded by a murderer who shot his load on the grass. Buddha's mother then, supposedly, accidentally sat on the semen-grass, and bingo-- Buddha come into being....

I have also heard, from pro-Buddhists, that Buddha's mother, Maya, lay down in a field, and a small, hallucinatory elephant supposedly entered her womb as she lay down, and BINGO-- up the duff she was!

Daft, I think. But... primitive thinkers need their miraculous births. The same primitive thinkers today worship rock singers and film stars and princesses.

As for... original sin. What a concept! Dead babies? No, dead sinners! What do you mean, sin -- Joey is three months old. Ah ha- but he was born from SEX, which means he is tainted -- off to hell with Baby Joey!

stinky!
 
The Myth story is that Jesus was immaculately conceived (i.e. without filthy mammalian sex.) Mary had no Y chromosomes in her DNA. How did she get the Y chromosome for Jesus when she did not have one?
Good question, but when you are dealing with 'creation' stories in religious mythologies you are always going to have issues with trying to treat them scientifically. Like G!d creating the world in seven days, and creating man out of mud and woman out of a rib, and man prior to animals....and on and on.... so if you are accepting of that as so literal fact, then G!d creating a Y chromosome 4,000 years after he created the world in seven days, sure isn't a feat.
1. Jesus was a female, raised as a male. (It happens.)
there is some evidence of that, his long flowing hair, his interest in peace and forgiveness, his momentary out of character rages at an olive tree and tipping over tables, and of course turning water into wine instead of beer or scotch.
2. Mary was conceived by a human male but her shame hid that fact.
not near as likely, gotta stick to some sort of reality when you are making up arbitrarily contrived situations whilst trying to prove your mythology trumps another's mythology.
3. At that conception, Mary had a billion to one incidence of one of her X chromosomes mutating into a Y chromosome. The odds were even higher.
so why would you mention a billion to one, if the odds are even higher? What are the odds?
4. God used Cosmic Magic that the Holy Spirit used to insert a Y chromosome while removing one X chromosome. The Holy Spirit's real name is David Copperfield who resides in the Andromeda Galaxy.
Now you are getting somewhere, yes G!d used the exact same magic as in Genesis, or as accomplished by Moses, again if you are a literalist, and believe things like you need to wash your genitals before you pray, and women should be covered...you know man made beliefs... But G!d is the one that lives in Andromeda, hence your reason for looking upward 'towards' G!d tis the holy spirit that in our midst...
I joke about this but without intent to slander Jesus. Jesus was a great man who taught morality, compassion, and justice. He did not need deification to be a great man. Superstition overshadowed his great mind.

Amergin
Ah your intention is directly to slander/disprove Jesus the Christ, Son of G!d and support the dogma you have been taught of Jesus the Tony Robbins Prophet...
 
Jesus himself is said to have told his disciples to "call no man on Earth father." As I read it, and an individual opinion it is, this is in reference to the fact that they had been "reborn," of the Spirit, and from above. For those who opt to be in, Jesus' father is "Our Father," according to the Pater Noster which he taught us to pray. The Quran says that the similitude of Jesus before God was like that of Adam, who had neither father nor mother, and this idea, of Jesus being the new, regenerate Adam, or, perhaps, what the Kabbalists call Adam Kadmon, is also articulated, though with significant divergence from the Quran, in the New Testament.
 
One may as well ask how certain amphibian and bird species can produce both female and male young in Parthenogenesis (actually happens, look it up--oh, and females can "turn into" males, as well). The X chromosome is big and strong and healthy, the Y little and partial (in all higher animals). In Parthenogenesis, the X chromosome is strinted in development to mutale into a Y.

Not saying this happened in J!sus' case. Just that is nothing "unscientific" at all.
 
Or the education available in 'finding Nemo'....the clown fish is a matriarchal societal group, the lead female of a small clan living in an around its anenome has quite the pecking order and if any member attempts to change it they are kicked out.

you got the smallest one....83% the size of the next in line....and the next is the opposite sex and 83% the size of the next up...which is again the opposite sex and 83%.... you get the idea....5-8 clown fish each sized accordingly in alternating sexes with a female leader...

Now should one or more die, or leave to form their own group (ie skirt to another anemone as they have no other defense) then the remainder will change sexes and grow in size to reach the societal norms again....

And should any grow or change sex at another time in an attempt to climb the social strata....they are ousted to the big sea alone.....

So Amergin, be careful where you tread when you attempt to shake the tree....tis a big lonely world out there...
 
Oh, I forgot about the amphibians and fish that can change gender when conditions require it for species preservation. I have trouble viewing Mary and Jesus as fish or frogs. They lived in a crap hole of dry, dusty, wind blown sand.

I said that I respect Jesus even more, knowing he was a man just like you or me. I realize that Jesus did not claim to be a god. I take him at his word. His pure humanity makes his mission much greater than if we pretend he was a god. If he were a god, it would be easy but not real.

One does not slander Jesus of Nazareth by renouncing the mythological Jesus the Christ. Jesus was much greater in his teaching than a Pagan Christ Idol. I feel that making Jesus into a fake Christ Idol only misleads people from his message. Worshipping a paganized Christ god is idolatry and it essentially nullified the power of his teachings. I revere the REAL JESUS.
 
The Myth story is that Jesus was immaculately conceived (i.e. without filthy mammalian sex.) Mary had no Y chromosomes in her DNA. How did she get the Y chromosome for Jesus when she did not have one?
A more interesting question might be this: Why the need for a "Y" chromosome? Was there a special need for Jesus to be male?
 
I revere the REAL JESUS.

I understand, Amergin, and so do I. As far as I am concerned, your iconoclasm places you in excellent historical company, I might add.

With that said, I also don't (invariably) mind the overlay -call it mythic, poetic, parabolic, etc.,- which is placed upon Jesus' exemplary life to make a spiritual point, despite the fact that this overlay can -caveat emptor!- easily enough degenerate into idolatry and inanity. I consider the Gospels as basically the multi-layered diaries of initiates into the so called mysteries. One of my favorite ante-Nicene writers and characters, the neo-Platonic (and Christian) Origen, whose testicles offended him so he plucked them off, thus taking Jesus arguably too literally at his word, and whose instructive role in the history of the early catechumenate is interesting to note, in his Commentary on the Gospel of St. John, makes a distinction between what he calls the "spiritual" (i.e., esoteric) and the "somatic" (i.e., exoteric) Gospel. Sometimes it might help to know whether we are discussing the former or the latter.

Anyway, carry on ...


Serv
 
I realize that Jesus did not claim to be a god.
John 10:30-38 New International Version (NIV)

30 I and the Father are one.”

31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’ [a] ? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside —36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? 37 Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. 38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
 
Not a bad translation to use, wil. Gets pretty good marks from The Jesus Seminar as being perhaps the real words.

What does it mean, though? That is the hard part.
 
Not a bad translation to use, wil. Gets pretty good marks from The Jesus Seminar as being perhaps the real words.

What does it mean, though? That is the hard part.

Jesus recognized his Christ self...his G!d self.

When he said I and the father are one...he was in a non dualistic mode...

I am that I am...

"I" the father was speaking..... Jesus was speaking as G!d as one. as one family, with all of us....

the son, the offspring, the thought that continually begets the only begotten...

we are all one, all brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers of creation.....all one, the first adam put us to sleep, how many second adams do we need....

tis all metaphor.....metaphor me.... metaphor you.... metaphor us to realize our oneness with the one and all that is.
 
John 10:30-38 New International Version (NIV)

30 I and the Father are one.”

This comment is taken out of context. My own father, an Amazon explorer and cartographer for Brazil. He was smarter than I. But at a scientific meeting which he attended, I commented, "How can I follow my more illustrious father." Dad said, "**** and I are the same." That would have meant the same if he said '**** and I are one. Dad and I both had the same first and last names. He graduated from U. of Edinburgh, and I graduated from U of Edinburgh School of Medicine. The comment is a sign of connection, not a claim that we are the same being.

31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

This was written by Greek speaking convert to the Paganising of Jesus, It was more likely a propaganda story to support the growing deification movement for Jesus.

33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

Again, propaganda to support Pagan deification of Jesus.

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’ [a] ? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside —36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? 37 Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. 38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”

This is irrational. Jesus supposedly (unproven) calling everyone gods. David was a son of God, and many others so named. Jesus used the term sons of god to mean all people who follow the God of Moses. This has been twisted into a false claim of deity by Paganised Christians. There is ample gospel quotes that contradict the deification of Jesus long after his death.

See the following post.

Amergin
 
Jesus never said, clearly and unequivocally, "I am God." He never said, "I am one of three persons making up God."

Jesus did say, addressing Mary Magdalene, (John 20:17) "...but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father; and to my GOD, and your GOD." In prayer to God, that is, the Father, Jesus said, “YOU, the only true GOD.” (John 17:3). He clearly states his (Jesus') relation to God was the same as that of Mary of Magdala. He and Mary of Magdala considered God to be both my (our) God and my (our) Father. We normally don't refer to Mary as the Daughter of God. God is everyone's Father. But Jesus himself, Mary Magdala (the apostle Jesus loved) and the brethren all considered “God” as their God.

"My God, My God, why hast THOU forsaken ME.?" This also shows a difference between Jesus and GOD. This shows that Jesus addressed GOD as other than himself. It also gives a valuable hint that Jesus didn't expect this outcome (being nailed on a cross) and felt forsaken. So he didn't know and was not omniscient, and not God. “My God,” was not from someone who considered himself to be God. And if Jesus were God, then by whom was he deserted? Himself? That would not make sense. Jesus also said: “Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit.” (Luke 23:46) If Jesus were God, for what reason should he entrust his spirit to the Father?


In 2 Corinthians 1:3 the apostle Paul confirms this relationship: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Since Jesus had a God, his Father, he could not at the same time be that God. “For us there is one God, the Father . . . and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ.” (1 Corinthians 8:6, JB) The apostle shows the distinction when he mentions “the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels.” (1 Timothy 5:21, RS Common Bible).

Jesus further showed that he was a separate entity denying being good? “No one is good but God alone.” (Mark 10:18, JB) So Jesus was distinguishing from God by saying: “Why do you call one is as good as God is, not even Jesus himself”. God is good in a way that separates him from Jesus.

“The Son cannot do anything at his own pleasure, he can only do what he sees his Father doing.” (John 5:19, The Holy Bible, by Monsignor R. A. Knox) “I have come down from heaven to do, not my will, but the will of him that sent me.” (John 6:38) “What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me.” (John 7:16) Is not the sender superior to the one sent? The followers of Jesus prayed to God about “thy holy servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, . . . and signs and wonders are performed through the name of thy holy servant Jesus.”—Acts 4:23, 27, 30, RS, Catholic edition. The Disciples themselves believed that Jesus was an important person, possibly more than human but not God. (Basis for Arian Christianity.)

Jesus indicated his Father’s superiority when he said: “Jehovah’s spirit is upon me, because he anointed me to declare good news to the poor.” (Luke 4:18). God is plainly the superior, for he anointed Jesus, giving him authority that he did not previously have.

“As for seats at my right hand and my left, these are not mine to grant; they belong to those to whom they have been allotted by my Father,” that is, God. (Matthew 20:23, JB) Had Jesus been Almighty God, those positions would have been his to give. But Jesus could not give them, for they were God’s to give, and Jesus was not God.

“Father, if you wish, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, let, not my will, but yours take place.” (Luke 22:42) To whom was he praying? To a part of himself? No, he was praying to someone entirely separate, his Father, God, whose will was superior and could be different from his own, the only One able to “remove this cup.”

“God [who] resurrected [Jesus] by loosing the pangs of death.” (Acts 2:24) The superior, God Almighty, raised the lesser, his servant Jesus, from the dead. Jesus Had Limited Knowledge. He stated: “But of that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Mark 13:32, RS, Catholic edition).

In Hebrews 5:8 Jesus “learned obedience from the things he suffered.” Can we imagine that God had to learn anything? No, but Jesus did, for he did not know everything that God knew. And he had to learn something that God never needs to learn—obedience. God never has to obey anyone.

Jesus did not make comments or indicate that he knew Leprosy was caused by a bacterium. He blamed it on sin. He could have at least recommended sanitary procedures like bathing, washing hands after contact that we do today, and there is very little Leprosy in Donegal. He did not know the common causes of blindness (glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, macular degeneration, cataracts, trachoma virus, Loa Loa, Sarcoidosis, Optic Neuritis, Optic nerve drusen, Optic nerve gliomas, strokes, alcoholic optic degeneration, and Ischemic Optic Neuropathy. There are more. He could have helped Sarcoid ophthalmopathy and Optic Neuritis with some simple anti-inflammatory herbal agents do work to some extent.

But Jesus either chose to not treat them, and teach them some self-treatment. Sanitation could stop the spread of Trachoma and Loa Loa. Dietary adjustment could have lessened the severity of all of the diabetic complications. I realise that he could do nothing for Optic Tumours or Macular Degeneration. He could have cautioned against alcohol (many neurological complications) but HE MADE WINE.

He thought demons caused epilepsy and mental illness. Lastly, Satan took Jesus to a high mountain to view all of the nations of the Earth. He and/or Jesus thought the Earth was flat. One cannot see nations on the opposite side of a spherical earth. Jesus and Satan could not see Japan, Hawaii, the Maori Kingdom of New Zealand, Champa, Vietnam, Cambodia, the Mexican, or the Andean Empires. If he supposedly created everything would not he know that the Earth was a sphere? As a Demon who supposedly saw Creation, and tormented people all over the world, he should have known the Earth to be spherical. Jesus didn’t question his premise that he could see all of the Nations from one mountain top. So Jesus and Satan both flunked Geometry.


All that we read in the New Testament suggests a fully human Jesus. If we are open minded comprehending what is written, cannot help but assume that God was superior to Jesus. And that Jesus was at best a created secondary deity or perhaps just a man.


The gospels were written in the First Century before the Romans had deified Jesus. The earliest gospel was written about 70 A.D. and John may have been written by 120 AD. At this time the exact status of Jesus was hotly debated. The gospels seem to be somewhere theologically between Ebionites and Nazarites with hint of evolving Arianism that is clearly present in Paul’s letters. Thus Arianism was very early before Bishop Arius preached it in 319 AD. This was the initial deification of Jesus but as a created and subordinate god obedient to the High God (JHWH).

Verses used to support the deification of Jesus are all very vague and ambiguous, such as "I am" but no definitive statement of divinity. As a matter of fact, “I am” Amergin. That vague “I am” comment is far outnumbered by the many statements indicating that he was not God, was not equal to the Father, but subordinate, and “sent” by the God.
 
All of this is interesting Amergin. But ultimately it is a matter of interpretation. You have yours. Wil, Thomas and I have ours.

If truth is "1" and false is "0", all four of our opinions fall somewhere in between. The "Jesus War" over H!s nature probably began in the first century and continues unabated. Traditional Christians (Eastern and Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic and their co-communionists) have a strong historical, philosophical, and theological base for their beliefs. For them, this was all put aside by Nicea.

A totally human J!sus can be read into the NT or interpreted there. So can a divine one... who is right? We probably never will know (scientifically).
 
who is right? We probably never will know (scientifically).

One will never know at all....unless there is life after death, and one is able to remember what the argument was about...

that is the key....we'll have all these people swearing that they have the one and only answer to all that is...

and ALL of them are full of crap, they may have their belief, what they've been told, the pablum they repeat....

or they may have had some psychotic experience from a nutrition defiecency, sleep deprivation, prolonged meditation, bad tuna fish or some good acid....and have been told by G!d, they saw the light...or whatever...

but even they....can't agree....as it seems G!d not only writes everything different in every book, he also tells folks different things in every vision...

Life....it is to be lived!! Contemplation is great, arrogance and ego and my religion is better than your religion.....a huge waste of time....

(oh and you can always tell when they've run out of arguments when it ends with G!d said/wrote it...or the classic...."but what if you are wrong?")
 
The Myth story is that Jesus was immaculately conceived (i.e. without filthy mammalian sex.) Mary had no Y chromosomes in her DNA. How did she get the Y chromosome for Jesus when she did not have one?

1. Jesus was a female, raised as a male. (It happens.)

2. Mary was conceived by a human male but her shame hid that fact.

3. At that conception, Mary had a billion to one incidence of one of her X chromosomes mutating into a Y chromosome. The odds were even higher.

4. God used Cosmic Magic that the Holy Spirit used to insert a Y chromosome while removing one X chromosome. The Holy Spirit's real name is David Copperfield who resides in the Andromeda Galaxy.

I joke about this but without intent to slander Jesus. Jesus was a great man who taught morality, compassion, and justice. He did not need deification to be a great man. Superstition overshadowed his great mind.

Amergin
lol jesus was male all the way. Where would you come up with the notion of saying he was a female raised as a male?
 
Back
Top