Who was Jesus' biological father?

[CryptoLutheran]

By that logic, if all humans believe the moon is larger than the sun, then the moon is larger than the sun.

To put it more bluntly, whose sperm mixed with Mary's egg cell to produce the embryo that became Jesus?

There was no sperm.

Christians confess based upon the accounts in Matthew and Luke, and the preserved tradition of the Christian faith as codified and articulated in all our ancient Creeds that Mary was a virgin and that Jesus' has no biological father. Jesus birth from Mary is regarded as a miraculous act of God which circumvented the ordinary methods of nature by which Mary became pregnant without being impregnated. And no, she was not impregnated by God, that is a fundamental misunderstanding by many but is not what historic, orthodox Christian teaching says.

There is no proof to back this up, instead it is an article of faith.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[CryptoLutheran]

What do unbiased historians believe about how Mary got impregnated?

Non-confessing historians are probably likely to regard Jesus as being the natural offspring of Joseph and Mary.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Cieza]

There was no sperm.

Christians confess based upon the accounts in Matthew and Luke, and the preserved tradition of the Christian faith as codified and articulated in all our ancient Creeds that Mary was a virgin and that Jesus' has no biological father. Jesus birth from Mary is regarded as a miraculous act of God which circumvented the ordinary methods of nature by which Mary became pregnant without being impregnated. And no, she was not impregnated by God, that is a fundamental misunderstanding by many but is not what historic, orthodox Christian teaching says.

There is no proof to back this up, instead it is an article of faith.

-CryptoLutheran

Who examined Mary that closely back then and determined there was no sperm involved?

Why would the people of that era have easily accepted that in an isolated case, a woman could be impregnated without sperm fertilizing the egg?

If Mary wasn't impregnated by a human male, then who or what did impregnate her?

In what manner was Mary's husband questioned about the impregnation of Mary?

To what degree was Mary's husband puzzled about her becoming pregnant? Did he think she cheated on him?

 

[Cieza]

Non-confessing historians are probably likely to regard Jesus as being the natural offspring of Joseph and Mary.

-CryptoLutheran

Why does Jesus have to be the product of a virgin birth rather than a sperm fertilizing an egg for the Jesus story to work?

 

[Deaver]

Why does Jesus have to be the product of a virgin birth rather than a sperm fertilizing an egg for the Jesus story to work?

It is the way God wanted it to be.

A couple of other things come to mind, which will really add to the difficulty of believing for non-believers:

Jesus is the Son of God and God is a Spirit and therefore there was no sperm

Jesus is God, therefore the whole conception thing was going to be a miracle.

Here is how the Bible explains it:

Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
(Luke 1:34-35 KJV)

 

[Cieza]

It is the way God wanted it to be.

A couple of other things come to mind, which will really add to the difficulty of believing for non-believers:

Jesus is the Son of God and God is a Spirit and therefore there was no sperm

Jesus is God, therefore the whole conception thing was going to be a miracle.

Here is how the Bible explains it:

Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
(Luke 1:34-35 KJV)

If Jesus were the result of sperm fertilizing an egg, would the Jesus story still work?

What were Luke's sources for his account of the impregnation of Mary and the birth of Jesus?

Is a human being who came into existence via a method other than sperm fertilizing an egg as much of a human being as one who came into existence due to sperm fertilizing an egg?

 

[razeontherock]

Why would the people of that era have easily accepted that in an isolated case, a woman could be impregnated without sperm fertilizing the egg?

Your assumption is laughable.

If Mary wasn't impregnated by a human male, then who or what did impregnate her?

You already know the answer: "The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." (Luke 1:35)

To what degree was Mary's husband puzzled about her becoming pregnant? Did he think she cheated on him?

He was in the process of getting a divorce. That really doesn't tell you enough? A Holy Angel of God gets all in your face telling you you have a specific fact wrong, and that's not something you shrug off, ya know?

 

[razeontherock]

Why does Jesus have to be the product of a virgin birth rather than a sperm fertilizing an egg for the Jesus story to work?

This question is deeper than I have seen from you lately. It is a good question, and I was not satisfied with any answer other than what G-d directly showed me. Why would I think you would be satisfied with any less? Why would I risk depriving you of that, by furnishing you with what to you would be second hand info? Why wouldn't you instead get your answer to this straight from G-d, give Him no rest until He explains it to you personally, and tell US what you found? Surely it would contain some unique perspective all of us lack. Seriously!

 

[zaksmummy]

Non-confessing historians are probably likely to regard Jesus as being the natural offspring of Joseph and Mary.

-CryptoLutheran

Actually they say she way raped by a Roman soldier.

 

[zaksmummy]

If Jesus were the result of sperm fertilizing an egg, would the Jesus story still work?

Is a human being who came into existence via a method other than sperm fertilizing an egg as much of a human being as one who came into existence due to sperm fertilizing an egg?

King David said "For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made."

God is the King of the Universe, he can do anything, he knows how to create people, cos we are his design, I really dont think he had too much trouble in impregnating Mary.

 

[drich0150]

cieza,
It appears you have a rebuttal for everyone except me. I hope this is a simple over site rather than, what it appears to be.

 

[Faulty]

If Jesus were the result of sperm fertilizing an egg, would the Jesus story still work?

No. The Messiah had to come through the line of David, through whom both Joseph and Mary came, but through different sons of David.

In the line of Joseph, there was an evil king named Jechoniah on whon God placed a blood curse (Jeremiah 22) so that no decendent of his could ever sit on the throne of David, on which the Messiah must sit.

So, a biological child of Joseph could never sit on the throne, and a mere man could not could not take God's wrath on our behalf for our sins. Hense a virgin birth, full God, full man, from the line of David under his earthly 'father' Joseph, but not bound by the blood curse.

Only a virgin birth could have accomplished this and it is the only way we can be saved.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Who examined Mary that closely back then and determined there was no sperm involved?

Why would the people of that era have easily accepted that in an isolated case, a woman could be impregnated without sperm fertilizing the egg?

What makes you think anyone easily accepted anything? Christians don't believe in Mary's virginity because of a two thousand year old midwife's report written on papyrus, but as an article of faith as I already said.

If Mary wasn't impregnated by a human male, then who or what did impregnate her?

I already answered that. Mary wasn't impregnated. She became pregnant without being impregnated.

In what manner was Mary's husband questioned about the impregnation of Mary?

To what degree was Mary's husband puzzled about her becoming pregnant? Did he think she cheated on him?

According to the Gospel story St. Joseph had every intention of ending the betrothal until an angel came to him in the night confirming that she was, in fact, a virgin.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[CryptoLutheran]

If Jesus were the result of sperm fertilizing an egg, would the Jesus story still work?

Yes.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[hedrick]

If Jesus were the result of sperm fertilizing an egg, would the Jesus story still work?

Yes, I think so. Jesus is a real human being. The Incarnation is based on that. So most of theology would work fine. I think the virgin birth is best seen as a sign pointing to Jesus' nature and role.

Obviously orthodox Christianity doesn't think that a human fertilized Mary's egg.

However that needn't mean that no human sperm fertilized the egg. The virgin birth simply says that there was no sex act. it says nothing about where the genetic material came from or how the egg was fertilized. God could have done it directly as a new act of creation. But he could just as well have used Joseph's sperm to fertilize the egg (or anyone else's, though you'd think Joseph would be the obvious candidate).

 

[Satt]

It is silly to think that the One who created DNA, sperm, eggs, etc. would be limited to the "rules" of One's own creation. As an engineer, if I write a program and eventually I want it to work differently, I simply "tweak" the code. It's not that complicated. We know nothing about the ways of God. We have faith. Period.

 

[razeontherock]

Best answer, Satt! I really don't think the Gospel works w/o a Virgin birth, for the reasons already given. (And maybe some more that haven't yet been given)

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Actually they say she way raped by a Roman soldier.

Some, probably. But certainly not all or even the majority; I would hedge my bets that only a small sliver of credible historians who subscribe to the Ben Pandera theory.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[addo]

Are you a troll or something? Sorry, but the Christian position is so very well known on this that I can't believe you actually make this question.

In the Christian worldview, Jesus Christ does not have a biological father, only a mother. God made it so that the Messiah would be born without the need of a biological father.

 

[bsd31]

What human being mated with the mother of Jesus through which the childbirth of Jesus resulted?

Did not happen. There was no need for a human being to mate with Mary to produce her offspring, Jesus the Christ who is the Son of God.

Why is that hard to understand?