Jesus: blood on the Shroud possessed the full XY chromosome pair

1. 50

   paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

   Garza-Valdes, together with Victor and Nancy Tryon, has carried out a PCR DNA test on blood samples taken from the Shroud ([18], pp. 115-119). He conducted a standard sex determination test. He looked for, and found, fragments of the amelogenin-X gene, which is found only on the X-chromosome, and the amelogenin-Y gene, which is found only on the Y-chromosome. Thus, Garza-Valdes concluded that the blood on the Shroud possessed the full XY chromosome pair.
   
   http://theophysics.host56.com/tipler-om … anity.html
   
   What does that signify?

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Goatus OQueefposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      This means that the blood belonged to a male.
      As the shroud was carbon dated by several independent labs to 1260-1390 with 95% confidence you could reject the idea that the blood belonged to Jesus.
      (Despite the claims that the dating was contaminated therefore inaccurate - http://mcri.org/home/section/63-64-293- … .d.-shroud)

      replyreport
   2. 61

      nightwork4posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      that it was male blood. why, what do you think it means, i'm dying to know.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Goatus OQueefposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         The X and Y chromosomes are the sex chromosomes found in humans.
         Males possess an X and a Y chromosome, and females have 2 X chromosomes (hence why the father determines the 50:50 chance of gender in babies as we get one sex chromosome from each parent to gain our own pair)
         I don't think it means anything other than the person whose blood was soaked into the shroud was male, no other significant conclusion could be drawn from that.

         replyreport
         1. 50

            paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            To me it signifies that Jesus was a normal male human being; he did not have any unidentified chromosomes that he should be believed to be a son of god or god.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               You should be more than able to comprehend this, Paas.
               
               http://www.yale.edu/faith/downloads/rp/ … nglish.pdf

               replyreport
               1. 53

                  Avril fawnieposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                  Virgin birth..
                  
                  I agree to xx.  Because of this he has no male side gens or line thus son of god like he said. As god is all. There is no line of males.
                  
                  Isnt taking  interpretation  What it is? Your learning something way older then you. You think they spoke english?(just a open question)(have no idea what u think)  Its translated...
                  Virgin birth... Could well mean birth of a man who has no male line in his blood. Adam and eve.. Of his ribs ......big things i am fine not understanding but worth pointing out. Do not know.
                  God is love. Worship god by love,  understand(acceptance)

                  replyreport
   3. 60

      A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      "What a pile of crap. I'm just glad he (Tipler) didn't base his arguments too heavily on nanotechnology, AI, or von Neumann probes; it would have given them all a bad name. The review in Nature called POI a “masterpiece of pseudoscience”. I disagree; I don't think it's that good."
      
      http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/tipler.html
      
      

      replyreport
2. 50

   paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

   What is the Meaning of the Expression “Son of God”?
   
   
   And the meaning of "begotten" son of god?

   replyreport
   1. 61

      TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Read the link... it explains it clearly. In a way any Muslim should understand.
      
      http://www.yale.edu/faith/downloads/rp/ … nglish.pdf

      replyreport
3. 50

   paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

   It shows Mary was not sired by any gods.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Could you tell us who claims Mary was sired by a God? I don't think even the Catholic church teaches that. I think their only argument is that  the stain of original sin was not on her. I could be wrong, but that's my understanding of their argument.

      replyreport
4. 50

   paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

   Adj.    1.    begotten - (of offspring) generated by procreation; "naturally begotten child"
   biological - of parents and children; related by blood; "biological child"
   
   http://www.thefreedictionary.com/begotten
   
   Jesus is said to be the only begotten son of god.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Ok. You may not understand the point. Begotten of God. Sired by God.  Son of God. Every mention of bloodlines in the Bible usually refers to the line of the father. Not the mother.
      
      The spiritual supposedly bonded with the physical. I assume that is why Son of Man was used also. To denote the tie to the flesh.
      
      Either way, you are attempting to argue a point no one has made, that I'm aware of. Mary was depicted as a simple woman. Not a god.

      replyreport
      1. 50

         paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         If Mary was a simple woman; then Jesus born of her must be a simple man only; those who say he was son of god are wrong.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            If the spirit moved over her and she became pregnant by that force, he would have been the son of God, just as surely as any child has a father. There are plenty of valid points to argue, this is not among them.

            replyreport
            1. 50

               paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Spirits don't make a woman pregnant.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  The will of God expressed thru his Word, does.
                  
                  You have a lot to learn Paas.

                  replyreport
                  1. 50

                     paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     It was not the will of God to make Jesus a god or son of god literally.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        That may hold true within the Islamic religion, maybe not within  sects of the Christian religion. You all believe what you want and ignore the rest.

                        replyreport
                  2. 50

                     paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     This has been explained by Garza-Valdes  :
                     
                     A tumor in the form of an undeveloped male embryo was in Mary's womb from her birth. As Garza-Valdes points out, such embryos (at least in the XX variety) have been reported in the medical literature, and he himself had a patient with this abnormality. The embryo in Mary's case would have fertilized one of Mary's eggs, resulting in the virgin birth of Jesus.
                     
                     http://theophysics.host56.com/tipler-om … anity.html

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        And Brother tore that BS apart without breaking a sweat.
                        
                        You should probrably go back and read that rather than throwing up that junk as some sort of fact. It is also well known that partheno-genesis occurs throughout the plant, and within the animal, kingdoms.
                        
                        So the Virgin birth is well within possibility, Paas.
                        
                        You should really pay attention to the discussion, Paas.
                        
                        Try again.

                        replyreport
                        1. 50

                           paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           So Jesus' birth from Mary was a phenomenon of  partheno-genesis occurring; it does not make Jesus a god or son of god.Jesus was a simple man as was Mary a simple woman.
                           
                           I do believe that Mary and Jesus had a converse from the Creator God.

                           replyreport
                           1. 61

                              TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                              I guess you also know that mohhammud was an epileptic, having inherited it from his mother Amina, and that his visions were no more than fits?
                              
                              You obviously want to deny the super-natural aspects of religion. Correct?
                              
                              And you are obviously ignoring the link to Yale also. So why bother conversing with you if you are not going to read the info and consider the point?
                              
                              There are plenty of Arabic expressions which embody the understanding of the use of the term... you choose to remain ignorant and continue to repeat this line simply to stir the pot.
                              
                              We have seen you for what you are form the beginning, Paas.

                              replyreport
                        2. 50

                           paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           I agree with you here.
                           
                           So Jesus' birth from virgin Mary is natural and normal and does not make him a god or a son of god.

                           replyreport
               2. 0

                  Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  And angels don't tell illiterate men things in secret meant to be turned into a religion. I know.

                  replyreport
               3. 81

                  aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Yet you say God (Spirit) created everything?
                  Why can't He do something so simple as a virgin birth?
                  Surely it's not as big a deal as making all matter, and giving all life?

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Apparently, God can do anything within a specific religion; but not outside of it. It's one of the limitations of an Almighty God.

                     replyreport
   2. 61

      TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Your knowledge of the bible is truly based on nothing more than Islamic myths and confabulations within the koran.
      
      And it shows, Paas.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         Michele Travisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         TMMason
         I read your link and it does explain a lot.  I hope more people read it.  Even though you were correct in what wrote, putting links up is very good.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Thank you, Michele.
            
            I simply wish our Muslim friends would take the time to read it and understand. But that would take all the fun out of using it for an argument.

            replyreport
            1. 67

               Michele Travisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               It would take the fun out of using it for an argument, but isn't it against the law for them to read anything that might help them in any small way, that Jesus Christ was sent to the earth by God for  forgivenss of our sins?

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Would you like to see the Islamic Jesus, "Isa"? And what the muslims believe he will do when he comes?
                  
                  Looky here...
                  
                  ‘Isa (Jesus) in the Hadith
                  
                  ‘Isa the destroyer of Christianity
                  
                  The prophet ‘Isa will have an important role in the end times, establishing Islam and making war until he destroys all religions save Islam. He shall kill the Evil One (Dajjal), an apocalyptic anti-Christ figure.
                  
                  In one tradition of Muhammad we read that no further prophets will come to earth until ‘Isa returns as ‘a man of medium height, or reddish complexion, wearing two light garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head although it will not be wet. He will fight for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill pigs, and abolish the poll-tax. Allah will destroy all religions except Islam. He (‘Isa) will destroy the Evil One and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die’. (Sunan Abu Dawud, 37:4310) The Sahih Muslim has a variant of this tradition: ‘The son of Mary ... will soon descend among you as a just judge. He will ... abolish the poll-tax, and the wealth will pour forth to such an extent that no one will accept charitable gifts.’ (Sahih Muslim 287)
                  
                  What do these sayings mean? The cross is a symbol of Christianity. Breaking crosses means abolishing Christianity. Pigs are associated with Christians. Killing them is another way of speaking of the destruction of Christianity. Under Islamic law the poll-tax buys the protection of the lives and property of conquered ‘people of the Book’. (At-Taubah 9:29) The abolition of the poll-tax means jihad is restarted against Christians (and Jews) living under Islam, who should convert to Islam, or else be killed or enslaved. The abundance of wealth refers to booty flowing to the Muslims from this conquest. This is what the Muslim ‘Isa will do when he returns in the last days.
                  
                  Muslim jurists confirm these interpretations: consider, for example, the ruling of Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 1368).
                  
                  
                  "... the time and the place for [the poll tax] is before the final descent of Jesus (upon whom be peace). After his final coming, nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus' descent (upon him and our Prophet be peace) ..." (The Reliance of the Traveller. Trans. Nuh Ha Mim Keller, p. 603).
                  
                  Ibn Naqib goes on to state that when Jesus returns, he will rule ‘as a follower’ of Muhammad.
                  
                  
                  http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/ … jesus.html
                  
                  
                  
                  And then there is this...
                  
                  The Qu'ran even denies jesus as an historic figure, though we know that to be BS. As we have many outside sources which reference Jesus.
                  
                  Non-Christian sources for Jesus
                  
                  • Tacitus (AD 55-120), a renowned historical of ancient Rome, wrote in the latter half of the first century that ‘Christus ... was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also.’ (Annals 15: 44).
                  
                  • Suetonius writing around AD 120 tells of disturbances of the Jews at the ‘instigation of Chrestus’, during the time of the emperor Claudius. This could refer to Jesus, and appears to relate to the events of Acts 18:2, which took place in AD 49.
                  
                  • Thallus, a secular historian writing perhaps around AD 52 refers to the death of Jesus in a discussion of the darkness over the land after his death. The original is lost, but Thallus’ arguments — explaining what happened as a solar eclipse — are referred to by Julius Africanus in the early 3rd century.
                  
                  • Mara Bar-Serapion, a Syrian writing after the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, mentions the earlier execution of Jesus, whom he calls a ‘King’.
                  
                  • The Babylonian Talmud refers to the crucifixion (calling it a hanging) of Jesus the Nazarene on the eve of the Passover. In the Talmud Jesus is also called the illegitimate son of Mary.
                  
                  • The Jewish historian Josephus describes Jesus’ crucifixion under Pilate in his Antiquities, written about AD 93/94. Josephus also refers to James the brother of Jesus and his execution during the time of Ananus (or Annas) the high priest
                  
                  
                  Do not be fooled by that perversion, islam.

                  replyreport
                  1. 67

                     Michele Travisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     There is another non-biblical reference to Jesus Christ which was written by Pliny The Younger ( son of Pliny The Elder).  Pliny The Younger was the roman govenor of Bithynia in Asia Minor.  He often wrote letters to Emeror Trajan.  In one of his letters,  he wrote:
                     
                     They were in the habit of meeting on a certain day before it was light, when they sang verses to a hyme to Christ, as a god, and bound themselves by a solemen oath, not to commit any wicked deed, never to commit any fraud, or theft, or adultery, faulsify their words, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up.
                     
                     This one was written about AD100
                     
                     There a more that have probably been burned or simply disintigrated by time.

                     replyreport
                     1. 67

                        Michele Travisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Thank you for the information you have given me about the Muslims belief's.  I need to learn more.  I will start doing that now.  I do know that in Muslim countries people die if they do not convert.  It used to happen in if people did not convert to Christianity, but does not anymore.

                        replyreport
                  2. 50

                     paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Quran does not deny the historic and real Jesus; Quran denies the mythical Jesus whom Christians believe to be a god or son of god.
                     
                     One may read account of historical and real Jesus starting with the following verses/chapter:
                     
                     [19:17] And relate the story of Mary as mentioned in the Book. When she withdrew from her people to a place to the east,
                     [19:18] And screened herself off from them, then We sent Our angel to her, and he appeared to her in the form of a perfect man.
                     
                     http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh … p;verse=10

                     replyreport
                  3. 60

                     A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     We aren't fooled by any religions, yours included, no matter how perverse.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        rbe0posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Who is "We" are you now speaking for athiests world wide?
                        
                        I beg to differ, i have convinced many athiest into joining my religion.
                        
                        
                        
                        Would you like to have a friendly talk over some delicious chicken?

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Jesus was a hippyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           Lol some people are just plain stupid

                           replyreport
                        2. 50

                           paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           What religion is yours.
                           
                           Do you think the Shroud of Turin is genuine?

                           replyreport
                  4. 50

                     paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Jesus of end times will prove with brilliant argument that Jesus son of Mary did not die on the Cross; he escaped death on the Cross and migrated from Judea, out of the Roman Empire.

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        You know as well as I do that all islamic scholarship on this matter, from the Itjahadis to the imams,  point to violence in that destruction. As accentuated by the verses of slaughtering the jews before such time as the mahdi can return. All translate its meaning as a war to reclaim jerusalem and the world.
                        
                        Shall I post the hadith and the Scholars for you, Paas?
                        
                        You know what is said and taught as well as I.

                        replyreport
                     2. 50

                        paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Breaking the Cross means proving peacefully and with reasonable arguments that Trinity is a false doctrine and Jesus did not die on the Cross; this has been elaborated by Quran.

                        replyreport