Jesus has no DNA from Mary
- Thread starter johnnywong
- Start date
Selene03
Active Member
- Feb 9, 2019
- 342
- 119
- 61
- Country
- Guam
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
Jesus was the Son of God and the Son of man. He was 100% God and 100% human. He got his DNA from Mary, which is how He became one of us. Jesus was not another human. He became one of us through Mary, who is also from the line of David.
The reason behind the Immaculate Conception is because Catholics understood Mary to be the New Eve. In Genesis, the first Eve was called "woman" because she was the mother of the living.
Genesis 2:22-23 Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man."
God made a promise in the Old Testament about the coming Savior. According to the Bible (the bold is mine):
Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.
The above Scripture was not referring to Adam's wife, Eve. It was referring to Mary, and scripture says "HER seed"....meaning that the DNA of Jesus came from Mary.
In the Old Testament, Jesus called His mother, "Woman". This is the same name that was given to the first Eve. By calling her "woman", Jesus is saying that His mother is the New Eve. Just as the first Eve was born sinless, the second Eve (Mary) was also conceived without sin.
John 2:3-4 And when they ran out of wine, the mother of Jesus said to Him, “They have no wine.” Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me? My hour has not yet come.”
John 19:26 When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!”
Just as there was a first Adam, there was a second Adam (Jesus). Just as there was a first Eve, there was also a second Eve (Mary). In the Old Testament, the first Eve came out from the rib of man, and man fell into sin. In the New Testament, it was man (the second Adam) who came out from the womb of Mary, and man did not fall into sin, but was redeemed. Mary was the New Eve whom God spoke about in Genesis 3:15. She was conceived without Original Sin. Of course, this doesn't mean that she didn't need a Savior. Like everyone else, she needed a Savior. God was was her Savior.
Luke 1:46 And Mary said: “My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, or he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant. From now on all generations will call me blessed, for the Mighty One has done great things for me— holy is his name.
Mary was the new Eve and became the new mother of the living.
The reason behind the Immaculate Conception is because Catholics understood Mary to be the New Eve. In Genesis, the first Eve was called "woman" because she was the mother of the living.
Genesis 2:22-23 Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man."
God made a promise in the Old Testament about the coming Savior. According to the Bible (the bold is mine):
Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.
The above Scripture was not referring to Adam's wife, Eve. It was referring to Mary, and scripture says "HER seed"....meaning that the DNA of Jesus came from Mary.
In the Old Testament, Jesus called His mother, "Woman". This is the same name that was given to the first Eve. By calling her "woman", Jesus is saying that His mother is the New Eve. Just as the first Eve was born sinless, the second Eve (Mary) was also conceived without sin.
John 2:3-4 And when they ran out of wine, the mother of Jesus said to Him, “They have no wine.” Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me? My hour has not yet come.”
John 19:26 When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!”
Just as there was a first Adam, there was a second Adam (Jesus). Just as there was a first Eve, there was also a second Eve (Mary). In the Old Testament, the first Eve came out from the rib of man, and man fell into sin. In the New Testament, it was man (the second Adam) who came out from the womb of Mary, and man did not fall into sin, but was redeemed. Mary was the New Eve whom God spoke about in Genesis 3:15. She was conceived without Original Sin. Of course, this doesn't mean that she didn't need a Savior. Like everyone else, she needed a Savior. God was was her Savior.
Luke 1:46 And Mary said: “My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, or he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant. From now on all generations will call me blessed, for the Mighty One has done great things for me— holy is his name.
Mary was the new Eve and became the new mother of the living.
Upvote
0
Selene03
Active Member
- Feb 9, 2019
- 342
- 119
- 61
- Country
- Guam
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
No, Mary never had any other children. In the original text of the gospel, the Greek word "adelphos" (meaning brothers) were used for the English translation. However, "adelphos" doesn't just mean blood brothers born of the same parents. It was also used to describe half-brothers, step-brothers, cousins, nephews, and uncles. In the Hebrew and Aramaic language, there are no words for half-brother, step-brother, cousin, nephew or uncle. The word "adelphos" was used to capture all these meanings for male relatives. But some of the Bibles used the word "brothers" instead of "brethren" in the English translation.
For example, some believe that James was the brother of Jesus, but that's incorrect. In Mark 6:3, scripture says that James was the brother of Jesus. Upon closer examination of scripture, we find that James (and Joses) was the son of Mary of Cleophas (Mark 15:40). Mary of Cleophas was one of the women from afar while the mother of Jesus was at the foot of the cross. So, who was Mary of Cleophas? The Bible says that she was our Blessed Mother's sister (John 19:25). Therefore, James was really a cousin of Jesus, not blood brothers. But the English translation used the word "brother" in the Bible because the Hebrew language didn't have any words to describe "cousin."
It's the same in my native language. The Chamorro bible used the word "mananko" for the English word "priest." We don't have any words in our language to describe "priest", but the word "mananko" was used because it means "elderly" and therefore the closest one to priest. This is actually incorrect because my people never used the word "mananko" for priest. Mananko was always used in reference to our elderly and grandparents.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
ZaidaBoBaida
When do I stop being a Newbie?
- Jul 17, 2012
- 1,962
- 631
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
To say that Jesus took no DNA from Mary is to deny his humanity which is Gnosticism which is heresy. Period.
Upvote
0
I don't think it would really matter whos DNA Jesus had. To think that God is somehow limited and can only use a "immaculate" vessel is nowhere to be found in scripture. In fact, I believe somewhere in the book of Luke Jesus mentions that God could have had the Messiah formed from the rocks if He wanted to.
Upvote
0
ZaidaBoBaida
When do I stop being a Newbie?
- Jul 17, 2012
- 1,962
- 631
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Except the book of Isaiah specifically says the messiah would be born of a virgin.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
I understand that the interpretation for "brothers" doesn't necessarily prove Jesus had brothers, but where is the scripture that specifically says Jesus was an only child? I don't recall any scripture saying that, so how do you know He didn't have any siblings?
Upvote
0
Yes, but God was not somehow restricted and was unable to form the Messiah in any other way. The only reason why the Messiah was born of a virgin was because God promised it would happen, and God doesn't break His promises. But don't think for one second that the Messiah couldn't have been born in any other way. Adam and Eve were born from the dust and there is nothing to suggest that it would have been impossible for God to do the same for the Messiah. Thus, there is absolutely no reason to suggest that Mary in any way is required to be "immaculate" in order to conceive the Messiah.
Upvote
0
ZaidaBoBaida
When do I stop being a Newbie?
- Jul 17, 2012
- 1,962
- 631
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
If Jesus had brothers and sisters - why did he have to tell John to look after his mother while he was hanging on the cross. Plus the book of John says Jesus brother's mocked him. Showing that kind of cheek would have been unthinkable in the ancient world if Jesus was the oldest and the probable head of the household (since many think Joseph had passed away by that time)
Upvote
0
Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.”
33 “Who are my mother and my brothers?” he asked.
34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.” (Mark 3: 31-35)
Did Jesus not have a mother either? Because in this passage, it seems as though Mary was in the same boat as the "brothers" in question.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Mar 11, 2003
- 11,683
- 8,019
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
Certainly we can agree to disagree on this subject. It is slightly off topic to the thread, so I’ll hold off on saying much more here. FWIW, I used to believe as you do.
That said, if you ever want to learn the reasons why we Orthodox believe it is the body and blood of Christ, you are always welcome in St Justin Martyrs, the debate subforum. I personally think it was very helpful to read the interpretations of the early Christians in the first and second century. Just my two cents
Upvote
0
I agree. The scripture in no way is suggesting that Jesus is denying that Mary is His mother, but neither is Jesus denying the brothers either.
Edit: I guess the point that I am trying to make is that God is omnipotent and nothing...ABSOLUTELY NOTHING is beyond His abilities. In regards to the OP, this would mean that Jesus' DNA structure has absolutely no impact to His divinity. However, the same goes for the "Immaculate Conception" regardless of whether it is true or not.
Upvote
0
Selene03
Active Member
- Feb 9, 2019
- 342
- 119
- 61
- Country
- Guam
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
With God, nothing is impossible. But it was God's choice to make Mary the Immaculate Conception so that she becomes the New Eve. By giving many honors to His mother, Christ fulfilled the fourth commandment perfectly: honor thy father and mother. Jesus not only honored God His Father, but also His mother Mary. She was made the New Eve and blessed for all generations.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
The main problem that I have with this is that the Immaculate Conception is never taught in the Bible. Although Mary is described as a godly woman (Luke 1:28) and a wonderful wife and mother that Jesus cherished (John 19:27), there is no reason to believe that Mary was sinless. In fact, the Bible clearly states that Jesus is the ONLY person not "infected" by sin and never committed sin. Otherwise, we have to ask ourselves where Mary fits in passages like Ecclesiastes 7:20, Romans 3:23, 2 Corinthians 5:21, 1 peter 2:22, and 1 John 3:5? Mary is not mentioned as an exception in Roman 3:23. This is why she needed a savior (Luke 1:47). If you combine this with the Omnipotence of God we can only conclude that the Immaculate Conception is neither biblical nor necessary.
Edit: I would like to point out that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception and the source of Jesus' DNA has absolutely not impact on our salvation. So it is comforting to know that regardless of who is right or wrong, it really doesn't matter. We will all have an opportunity to ask God ourselves someday.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
