Inbreeding's Beginning

[th1bill]

i didn't find the idea offensive at all. it does solve the chicken or the egg problem.

i think the biggest evidence for evolution not working out is that we haven't seen humans split into multiple species in the last 50,000 years, but we might have come close to doing so, iirc they found a first generation, human-Neanderthal hybrid in France a few years ago, and sure enough she would have been sterile had she not died as a child.

my wife has issues not feeling human as she has some strange health problems and her dad is probably 5% Neanderthal, her mom is from northern europe. genetically they are separated by my guess, at least 20,000 years.

This subject will never be offensive to the Non-believer but is inherently obnoxious to any True Believer, the People of Faith.

 

[joestue]

I believe that where God is silent then so should we be

God is silent.. publicly.
the rest of what isn't in the bible is given on a need to know basis.

The most important thing to note in Gen 2:21a-22a is that Eve wasn't created
directly from the soil as Adam was, viz: Eve wasn't a discreet creation, i.e. her
gender isn't a unique specie.

and this is what's important.

calling her his sister doesn't really make sense biologically but i can understand the analogy, and its not offensive.
can we take a man, and make a woman from him by just removing the Y chromosome and replacing it with a second copy of his X?

probably. would the clone be his sister? what does that question mean?

Did GOD insert additional information into Eve's dna than he did Adam? what if the answer is indeed.. NO.

More women than expected are born with a hidden variation in sex development - Novo Nordisk Fonden

AF MORTEN BUSCH Kønskromosomerne giver normalt svaret på om du er kvinde eller mand. Kvinder har XX. Mænd XY. En lille gruppe af kvinder er dog rent genetisk mænd. De vokser op som kvinder med en kvindes krop, og de fleste opdager først langt inde i puberteten, at de er anderledes. Nu har danske...

novonordiskfonden.dk

Girls born with XY chromosomes are genetically boys but for a variety of reasons – mutations in genes that determine sexual development – the male characteristics are never expressed. They live their lives as girls and then women, and a few can even give birth. Our research, which is the first nationwide survey in the world, shows that this group is up to 50% larger than previously assumed

 

[Beetow]

FAQ: From whence did baby Jesus obtain a Y chromosome for his male gender?

A: In the beginning, God constructed Eve's entire body with some material taken
from Adam's body, so I'd imagine it would be no more difficult for God to construct
a teensy little Y chromosome for baby Jesus with some material taken from Mary's
body.

The beauty of it is that a Y chromosome constructed with material taken from
Mary's body would not be an alien substance created ex nihilo; but would be 100%
natural, and easily traceable all the way back to Eve, and from thence to the very
dust that was used to construct Adam's body.

I can't prove any of this of course, but nevertheless I sincerely believe that what I
suggest herein actually took place when the power of the Most High overshadowed
Jesus' mom per Luke 1:35; and if my suggestion is true, then little Jesus was
thoroughly a Jew from top to bottom-- biologically descended from not only David,
but also Adam, the Man that God created in the book of Genesis.

• Heb 2:17 . . He had to be made like his brethren in every way

NOTE: Most Christians will readily attest that Jesus Christ is fully God and fully
Man; while in reality a number of them aren't quite sure that he wasn't some sort
of divine hominid implanted in Mary's uterus; i.e. they honestly believe Jesus' mom
may have been his surrogate mother rather than his biological mother.
_

 

[joestue]

they honestly believe Jesus' mom may have been his surrogate mother rather than his biological mother.

My observation is that people never question that part of it, but they question who his father (biologically) was.. because of certain beliefs that mankind inherits original sin from the father, not the mother. so God had to be Jesus' "father" so that he wouldn't be born with a "sin nature" *
however many Catholics believe original sin is from the mother, not the father, and some of them believe both Mary and Mary's mother to have both been sinless in order to weasel their way around that problem.
(in fact that is one of the reasons why my mom left Catholicism and became protestant, but she never fully recovered and passed on a "guilt based" powerless Christianity to her children)
*so where this gets interesting is when you ask the question.. well then how could Jesus have been tempted in all the ways we are, if he didn't have a sin nature.
to answer this, we have to ask "what is a sin nature" and.. well, we don't know.
Paul calls it the flesh which wars against the spirit. but from my point of view, Paul's writings on that subject make more sense to someone with a divided mind because of trauma. one part believes, another part doesn't. one part desires sin, another part doesn't. Jesus didn't have that problem for sure.

 

[joestue]

Y chromosome constructed with material taken from Mary's body

or the original Y chromosome God created Adam with.

or, more interestingly, what's wrong with God using Josephs Y chromosome.

In my opinion we do not exist before conception, but this doesn't prevent us from having spiritual experiences in the womb (which is where a lot of pre-birth experiences may be happening), but that God delegated full "creation" power both spiritually and physically to "adam" and "eve" and so at conception a new "spirit" or "soul" is in fact generated and did not exist prior.

so the problem with a savior being born of the flesh is you'd have to ask the question, where did the spirit created at conception go? if God was going to insert his own Spirit in to the embryo, where did the human spirit go? you'd be left with a half breed. half human half God, which interestingly is what many other religions have.

i think that Jesus was Mary's X chromosome and God's original Y that he created Adam from. in this manner he experienced all the corruption of the flesh incurred over the prior 4000 years.. but he didn't have the spiritual corruption passed on.

secondly, i don't know that its actually necessary for Jesus to have been tempted by evil desires for him to have been tempted in all the ways we are.. he was God, he had no evil desires.

to some extent it may be our earthly parents responsibility to teach us to fight off the evil desires we were born with. (which may be a unique situation for each family line, due to generational curses and other problems)

 

[complete]

My observation is that people never question that part of it, but they question who his father (biologically) was.. because of certain beliefs that mankind inherits original sin from the father, not the mother. so God had to be Jesus' "father" so that he wouldn't be born with a "sin nature" *
however many Catholics believe original sin is from the mother, not the father, and some of them believe both Mary and Mary's mother to have both been sinless in order to weasel their way around that problem.
(in fact that is one of the reasons why my mom left Catholicism and became protestant, but she never fully recovered and passed on a "guilt based" powerless Christianity to her children)
*so where this gets interesting is when you ask the question.. well then how could Jesus have been tempted in all the ways we are, if he didn't have a sin nature.
to answer this, we have to ask "what is a sin nature" and.. well, we don't know.
Paul calls it the flesh which wars against the spirit. but from my point of view, Paul's writings on that subject make more sense to someone with a divided mind because of trauma. one part believes, another part doesn't. one part desires sin, another part doesn't. Jesus didn't have that problem for sure.

Hello @joestue,

Yes, the Lord was made in the 'likeness' of sinful flesh:-

'There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus,
who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus
hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh,
God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh,
and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us,
who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh;
but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
(Rom 8:1-6)

Thank you