The paintings of him you are refering to were done by artist who wanted to make something that looked good to them at their time. They didn't know Jesus or what he looked like. They just wanted to express an idea and present it in the way that their contemporaries would know what it was supposed to be. IMO, Jesus probably looked nothing like the pale, pasty looking European models used in art.
I was referring to the rendering of the beloved disciple in art especially the last supper painting, not Jesus. Many think it's John but it looks too feminine to be John. Jesus was rendered with facial hair.
I believe the beloved disciple is a daughter of Christ.
Not quite a clone. A clone would be genetically identical. A biological virgin birth doesn't necessarily have to have ALL of the genetic material of the mother. All of our chromosomes are in pairs. And, generally each of a particular pair are not identical. A biological virgin offspring COULD have one of the elements of any pair duplicated and then not have a copy of the other element. You ARE correct, though, that a biological virgin birth would ALWAYS be a female. The fact that Christ was male illustrates the miracle of the Holy Spirit's part in the conception.
Really? I thought they were clones. I mean I read it in many science journals that the offsprings will be clones of the mother....
...However, I like your theory better if it's true. Because if the offspring is not a clone then it makes virgin reproduction a possible alternative to normal reproduction without adverse consequences due to genetic diversity still maintained.
Anyway, I have my personal reasons why Jesus can't be male if the Holy Spirit was real and not an impostor. For example, man is statistically shown to have 10x more chances to break the law than women. Thus, if we're looking for a natural savior, naturally, she would be a woman because the male genetic material increases the chances of transgression...
...The virgin birth only serves to compound the fact that male genetic material is unwanted and virgin birth serves a natural and important purpose, it's not just for the sake of having a grand entrance in this world.. Logically speaking, Jesus has to be a female. Some of the deepest teachings of Christ in the Bible implied the Holy Spirit isn't a big fan of fanfare but rather often operates subtly and often blends unseen with natural events. Thus, a male saviour who unusually isn't corrupted by shortcomings of the male gender just adds to the bling but is totally unnecessary when a female would satisfy all requirements without further fanfare.
Why would the Holy Spirit work subtly instead with a bag or big signs??? Because if you need big signs to believe, then you have not believed at all. It's the big signs that you believed and not the person.
