Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Yavapai

(825 posts)
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 04:18 PM Apr 2012

Please help me on this.

After watching the previous post entitled “Is there a God”, I started thinking about a few things. Among them was the virgin birth of Jesus.

If Mary conceived without a man, wouldn’t that mean that there would only one set of DNA involved in the now fertile egg (Mary’s)?

If this was the case, wouldn’t Jesus have been a clone of Mary? If Jesus was a clone of Mary, wouldn’t Jesus have to have been born a female?

Does this line of thought sound logical, or should I just lay off the medical brownies while reading this group???

Thanks in advance for your responses (in case this post even merits a response.)

17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Please help me on this. (Original Post) Yavapai Apr 2012 OP
That's about right... laconicsax Apr 2012 #1
Haploid Ron Obvious Apr 2012 #2
In wakadoodle world anything can happen. Warren Stupidity Apr 2012 #3
"viewing nonsense through a rational lens." mr blur Apr 2012 #5
as I understand it, the term "Virgin Birth" really was supposed to mean zbdent Apr 2012 #4
No, virgin birth is supposed to mean virgin birth. Curmudgeoness Apr 2012 #6
No, that was because of Mary's immaculate conception. laconicsax Apr 2012 #7
Ah, you got the right one that I was thinking ... zbdent Apr 2012 #9
Also, Mary was also only 12 or 13 years old. tdb63 Apr 2012 #12
Technically, it was the Holy Ghost who did it. laconicsax Apr 2012 #15
In real life, what you say makes sense. Curmudgeoness Apr 2012 #8
No, because god is magic and science is stupid. Iggo Apr 2012 #10
This message was self-deleted by its author Ian David Apr 2012 #11
Mary had it made! AlbertCat Apr 2012 #13
Did Adam & Eve have belly buttons? Yavapai Apr 2012 #16
Many years ago, I read an article about virgin births RebelOne Apr 2012 #14
Two problems with your post... Bradical79 Apr 2012 #17
 

laconicsax

(14,860 posts)
1. That's about right...
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 04:24 PM
Apr 2012

Parthenogenesis results in a clone of the mother.

If Jesus had no biological dad, she was a clone of her mother.

But, since Jesus wasn't a real person, it doesn't really matter.

 

Ron Obvious

(6,261 posts)
2. Haploid
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 04:36 PM
Apr 2012

I believe an old joke on talk.origins referred to the 'H' in Jesus H. Christ as 'Haploid'.

I don't know. This is a bit like trying to disprove Santa's sleigh using physics to me. We have two mostly non-overlapping camps here who won't be convinced by arguments made in the sphere of the other side's reality.

In other words, if you're trying to use science and reason to disprove people's religious notions, your chance of success is nearly exactly the same as a religious believer's chance of success in convincing a non-believer through appeal to faith.

 

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
3. In wakadoodle world anything can happen.
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 04:39 PM
Apr 2012

Virgin Birth is a myth-meme that occurs frequently in various religions. As the gods can do anything, a virgin birth can produce a male child from a female egg. Your mistake is viewing nonsense through a rational lens. Santa can't fit down a chimney either. The cow could not possibly jump over the moon.

 

mr blur

(7,753 posts)
5. "viewing nonsense through a rational lens."
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 05:49 PM
Apr 2012

That would be progress for some of the theists around here.

zbdent

(35,392 posts)
4. as I understand it, the term "Virgin Birth" really was supposed to mean
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 04:50 PM
Apr 2012

that Jesus was born without the stigma of "original sin" ...

Curmudgeoness

(18,219 posts)
6. No, virgin birth is supposed to mean virgin birth.
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 07:37 PM
Apr 2012

All Christian religions that I know considered Mary a virgin at the time she got pregnant.

 

laconicsax

(14,860 posts)
7. No, that was because of Mary's immaculate conception.
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 07:40 PM
Apr 2012

She was born free of original sin.

Virgin birth had to do with Mary getting pregnant without having sex. It was a routine miracle in contemporary religions.

zbdent

(35,392 posts)
9. Ah, you got the right one that I was thinking ...
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 09:07 AM
Apr 2012

It wasn't Jesus who was born without original sin, it was Mary.

My error ... got that mixed up.

tdb63

(73 posts)
12. Also, Mary was also only 12 or 13 years old.
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 11:18 AM
Apr 2012

Mary was born free of sin due to her mothers immaculate conception of Mary. Mary's mother was barren when she gave birth to Mary. But, Mary was only 12 or 13 years old when she was impregnated. Yahweh was abit of a ped as we all know.

 

laconicsax

(14,860 posts)
15. Technically, it was the Holy Ghost who did it.
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 03:07 PM
Apr 2012

Now, while apologists have come up with all sorts of excuses for why impregnating a 13-year-old against her will isn't rape, impregnating a 13-year-old against her will is rape.

Curmudgeoness

(18,219 posts)
8. In real life, what you say makes sense.
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 07:42 PM
Apr 2012

But.....if "God" created everything, including humans and DNA, it would be a piece of cake for him to "create" a properly fertilized egg. You just don't get it. This is how it goes: God is a male figure. God impregnated Mary. The fertilized egg is "perfect". End of discussion.

Response to Yavapai (Original post)

 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
13. Mary had it made!
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 01:42 PM
Apr 2012

Sure, she had to watch he son get crucified, but not only did she get to avoid icky sex with a hairy man, she didn't even have to die! She just shot up into heaven...whooosh!
(and I always thought "Our Lady of the Assumption" just meant she said to Joseph, "Well, I assume it's god's....&quot

In the Mahabharata, Kunti gives birth to 3 sons! No, 4 sons! and her virginity remains intact! But alas, she burns to death in a forest fire. Mary didn't even have to go thru something like that.


Next up:

Did Adam & Eve have belly buttons?

 

Yavapai

(825 posts)
16. Did Adam & Eve have belly buttons?
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 09:19 PM
Apr 2012

Of course they did, but they only were able harvest lint from them after they became aware that they were ashamed from being naked...

...or something like that.

First was Adam, then came Eve. They produced Cain the Able. Then Cain slew Able. That would make the world population to be a total of three, right? Then Cain got married. Where the fuck did his wife come from?????????????

RebelOne

(30,947 posts)
14. Many years ago, I read an article about virgin births
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 03:05 PM
Apr 2012

and it was always female babies. I don't remember the source, but it was interesting.

 

Bradical79

(4,490 posts)
17. Two problems with your post...
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 12:06 PM
Apr 2012

The first is that the stories in the scriptures may have been misinterpreted and mistranslated for quite awhile. The evidence for Mary even being considered a virgin as we think of a virgin at the time these were written is pretty weak. Other than it only being mentioned in two of the gospels, virginity was a more inclusive trait at the time. Someone who was a virgin had as much to do with their perceived ability to concieve as it did with the actual not having had sex. A girl who was thought to have not reached a stage where she could conceive of child was considered a virgin regardless of if she had had sex or been raped. Also, a woman who was thought to be to old to conceive could be considered a "virgin" too. I read a great book on the history of Christianity that had mentioned misinterpretations of Mary's virginity and lack of real evidence in scripture supporting the story, but unfortunately I accidentally ruined the book and have yet to buy another copy :-P Here's the first decent link I found though:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/dec/16/religion.commentisfree

The second thing wrong with your post is that the God most Christians believe in is all powerful and not confined to our laws of physics or understanding of reality. In other words, such a being could have made Jesus look like Bugs Bunny, simply be controlling our every thought and emotion for fun, or have willed our entire universe into being a few minutes ago creating false memories and histories for everyone alive. In fact, no crazy religious idea regardless of if its written in a book or made up on the spot would be more implausible than any other since a being is involved that can do whatever the fuck it wants. Look up "Flying Spaghetti Monster"

Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Atheists & Agnostics»Please help me on this.