Latest News: The Great Trubulation


Pages (6): « First [1] 2 3 4 5 Next > Last »
Jesus bloodline
Author Message
Angellynn
Member


Posts: 107
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #1
Jesus bloodline

One of the medical advances of modern science today is what we know as the

‘surrogate mother.’ When a man and his wife learn that the wife is unable to carry a

child to full-term, they will have their doctor extract sperm and egg cells from them. He

then fertilizes the egg cell in the laboratory using the sperm of the husband and then

implants the fertilized egg into the womb of another woman where it will be nourished and

will grow. When the embryo reaches full-term, this woman then gives birth to the child and

turns this child over to the parents. Although this woman has carried this child in her womb

for nine months and has given birth to it, the child does not possess any of her genes

just those of the parents who donated the sperm and egg cells. This knowledge helps us to

understand how Jehovah brought about the 'birth of Jesus' in David’s lineage. Jesus’ life

force, in embryo form, was implanted in Mary’s womb where it grew to full-term and she

gave birth to him. He did not inherit any of her genes so he could be born perfect.


Taken from Living waters group. How can this be true?

04-27-2007 10:13 PM
Find all posts by this user
Jah's Slave Girl
Unregistered


Post: #2
RE: Jesus bloodline

Angellynn-

This is a very interesting thought, I do agree.  It really makes you think.  :thumbsup:

Now that we know that this is physically possible, beyond a doubt, and it is proven by modern science.  So, why couldn't Jehovah have used this process to implant the embryo of Jesus inside Mary's womb?  This way, it would have been possible for him to be born without sin.

Agape,
Jah's Slave Girl

04-27-2007 11:35 PM
jon
Member


Posts: 65
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #3
RE: Jesus bloodline

Jah's Slave Girl Wrote:
Angellynn-

This is a very interesting thought, I do agree.  It really makes you think.  :thumbsup:

Now that we know that this is physically possible, beyond a doubt, and it is proven by modern science.  So, why couldn't Jehovah have used this process to implant the embryo of Jesus inside Mary's womb?  This way, it would have been possible for him to be born without sin.

Agape,
Jah's Slave Girl




show me in the Bible where this is a teaching of Jehovahs not of Don Burney

04-29-2007 12:30 PM
Find all posts by this user
Jah's Slave Girl
Unregistered


Post: #4
RE: Jesus bloodline

jon Wrote:
...show me in the Bible where this is a teaching of Jehovahs not of Don Burney?


Are you saying Jesus was born from the actual "bloodline" of Mary?

Or, will you suddenly and mysteriously disappear (as so many others on this discussion board have done) when faced with such a question...I wonder...

Anyway, I was under the distinct impression it was IMPOSSIBLE to beget a perfect person (Jesus) from an IMPERFECT person (Mary).

But perhaps, you may know different. Any thoughts?

JSG

04-29-2007 08:40 PM
gus
-------------------------


Posts: 2,034
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #5
RE: Jesus bloodline

There are many things about genetics which we don't understand. I think it's assumed that imperfect people can't generate perfect children. But I'm not sure that an individual's genetic code is at fault. I haven't read any professional journals which tell me that, with the exception of some genetic diseases, we are pre-programmed to die, or that death is inevitable for any other reason than we accept its inevitability. I'd say that sin puts us into a retrograde existence.

I'm not sure that Jesus needed any other genes than the ones he was provided, his mother's. Today, animals are being cloned. There is a lot of potential in genetics. I think perfection meant that he was never prone to sin...and that he was very well-connected, enjoying the protection that only YHWH could provide. That's what made it all the more painful for Jesus to be temporarily abandoned (not to mention the pain his Father experienced).

Then again, I'm no geneticist.

gus

04-29-2007 10:53 PM
Find all posts by this user
Angellynn
Member


Posts: 107
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #6
RE: Jesus bloodline

If Mary carried the baby for nine months and it used her blood to flourish and grow , he would have to have her genes and DNA. It was Jehovah who made Him perfect.

04-29-2007 11:35 PM
Find all posts by this user
man hu
Babe and any other piggy names


Posts: 2,498
Group: Moderator
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #7
RE: Jesus bloodline

A baby is genetically different from its mother; all babies are. This is one of the wonderful things about pregnancy, it is the fact that the baby is not rejected as a foreign body.
It took doctors quite some time to discover how to perform in vitro  fertilisation, which is what you mentioned in your first post. The reason for this is the sperm passes through the uterus, before entering the fallopian tubes. There is a chemical in the uterus that enables the sperm to penetrate the egg (ovum). Sperm have a region on their heads called an acrosome, but this is only capacitated (enabled) by the chemical in the uterus (bit like priming a depth charge).
Technical difficulties aside, a woman can carry any child in her uterus because it is screened off from her antibodies. The only problem is that of a rhesus negative mother developing antibodies for a rhesus positive baby.

There is one problem with the fully formed embyo idea and that is in Luke 1:31, where the phrase sullempse en gastri is used.
The verb is sullambano and means to bring together, to put together as in bringing the mouth and eyes of a corpse together closing them, to recieve together, or to conceive. So a joining (or conception) actually taking place in the belly is what is being explained by the angel Gabriel.
Also notice how accurate He is. He does not say this will take place in the womb, he says en gastri which means in belly (hence gastric juices, gastroenteritis, all from the greek meaning belly) He did not use the word hyster which means womb (as in hysterectomy).
As you know, conception never takes place in the womb and only takes place in the fallopian tubes hence this phrase of Gabriel is scientifically accurate even though it was only in the twentieth century that it was discovered that conception never takes place in the womb.
Thus the idea of a ready formed embryo being implanted does not jell with the scriptures. What human doctors can do today, gives us a glimpse of Jehovah's powers though.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1sj2gQJIKI
05-19-2007 09:12 AM
Find all posts by this user
e-magine
Disciple of Newness


Posts: 2,488
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #8
RE: Jesus bloodline

Thanks hu, you always impress me. :redface:


avatar:
Henry Ward Beecher-1872 Preacher of Plymouth Church, Brooklyn, in his home later bought by C.H. Russell.
He is looking at the Brooklyn Bridge,,,, is it the way into, or, out of Brooklyn for you?
05-19-2007 09:29 AM
Find all posts by this user
man hu
Babe and any other piggy names


Posts: 2,498
Group: Moderator
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #9
RE: Jesus bloodline

Some confusion may occur because I only know of one translation that renders this phrase of Gabriel's correctly, and that is the 2001 translation. Many Bibles skip over the conception part and just say something like "you will become pregnant". That poor, and very loose translation helps with the 'God Incarnate' teaching.

Always check your Greek and it ain't that hard. The Interlinear Bible does alot of the work for you, even if it renders the words incorrectly in the main text.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1sj2gQJIKI
05-19-2007 06:08 PM
Find all posts by this user
Jah's Slave Girl
Unregistered


Post: #10
RE: Jesus bloodline

Angellynn Wrote:
If Mary carried the baby for nine months and it used her blood to flourish and grow , he would have to have her genes and DNA. It was Jehovah who made Him perfect.


That is totally incorrect.

First off we have to recognize, the baby's genes and DNA DO NOT, I repeat do not come from circulating blood, but are imprints in the cell, both egg cell and sperm cell.

Also I checked a source written by a physician to see whether the mother's blood passed through the placenta to the embryo and learned that it does not. So the baby develops with a separate circulatory system separate from the mother who carries the baby. All of this shows how a "surrogate" mother doesn't actually contribute anything to the actual formation of the baby, DNA wise, blood wise or any other way, thus making the "surrogate" mother just a temporary incubator of sorts, carrying the baby till birth.

The book is Your Pregnancy, week by week, by Dr. Glade B. Curtis, OB/GYN and Judith Scheeler, MS, 5th edition, page 110.

They write that "circulation is separate fetal blood does not mix with your mother's blood."

There are many other sources that can be checked if you disagree with this statement.

Interesting, Psalms 139:16 speaks of Jesus' miraculous formation as being in the "embryo" state. Of course, all of this would occur in the womb of Mary (and not within the fallopian tube as would be in conception where sperm and egg unite). No but instead the actual starting point of Jesus' existence on earth as a human was actually in the EMBRYO STATE, where he would be placed in the womb of Mary. Meaning, Jehovah simply implanted the "embryo" of Jesus in Mary simply making her a "surrogate" mother only in his sight. Accordingly, Mary contributed no DNA, blood or anything else to the formation of this perfect baby.

JSG

05-23-2007 01:35 AM
man hu
Babe and any other piggy names


Posts: 2,498
Group: Moderator
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #11
RE: Jesus bloodline

Psalm 139. These are the words of David. It refers to him.
It may be prophetic and also refer to Jesus, but verse 16 only says God saw his embryo. It says nothing about placing embryos in wombs. This is to be expected, since Jesse and his wife produced David by ordinary means.


It is fascinating that in verse 13 it talks about the baby being screened off, which is accurate. Normally there is no transfer of blood, across the placenta, but the fetus does have a different type of blood.

Warning! Biology lesson coming up!

The red stuff in meat (muscle) is not hemoglobin or blood but myoglobin. Myoglobin takes up oxygen more easily than hemoglobin. So oxygenated hemoglobin circulates in the blood stream and myoglobin 'grabs' the oxygen from the hemoglobin for the hardworking muscles.
Similarly, babies in the womb, fetuses, do not have adult hemoglobin; they have fetal hemoglobin (hemoglobin F, or HbF). This again has a greater oxygen uptake, so that the blood of the baby can 'wrest' the oxygen from the hemoglobin of the mother. This transfer of oxygen takes place across the placenta.
Once the baby is born, fetal hemoglobin is replaced by ordinary hemoglobin and the gradual replacement of one by the other has normally been completed by 12 weeks. If a fetus did not have this special type of hemoglobin with a very high oxygen uptake, it would suffocate in the womb. Truly we are wonderfully made!


vicky


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1sj2gQJIKI
05-23-2007 04:21 AM
Find all posts by this user
Angellynn
Member


Posts: 107
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #12
RE: Jesus bloodline

Jah's Slave Girl Wrote:

Angellynn Wrote:
If Mary carried the baby for nine months and it used her blood to flourish and grow , he would have to have her genes and DNA. It was Jehovah who made Him perfect.


That is totally incorrect.

First off we have to recognize, the baby's genes and DNA DO NOT, I repeat do not come from circulating blood, but are imprints in the cell, both egg cell and sperm cell.

Also I checked a source written by a physician to see whether the mother's blood passed through the placenta to the embryo and learned that it does not. So the baby develops with a separate circulatory system separate from the mother who carries the baby. All of this shows how a "surrogate" mother doesn't actually contribute anything to the actual formation of the baby, DNA wise, blood wise or any other way, thus making the "surrogate" mother just a temporary incubator of sorts, carrying the baby till birth.

The book is Your Pregnancy, week by week, by Dr. Glade B. Curtis, OB/GYN and Judith Scheeler, MS, 5th edition, page 110.

They write that "circulation is separate fetal blood does not mix with your mother's blood."

There are many other sources that can be checked if you disagree with this statement.

Interesting, Psalms 139:16 speaks of Jesus' miraculous formation as being in the "embryo" state. Of course, all of this would occur in the womb of Mary (and not within the fallopian tube as would be in conception where sperm and egg unite). No but instead the actual starting point of Jesus' existence on earth as a human was actually in the EMBRYO STATE, where he would be placed in the womb of Mary. Meaning, Jehovah simply implanted the "embryo" of Jesus in Mary simply making her a "surrogate" mother only in his sight. Accordingly, Mary contributed no DNA, blood or anything else to the formation of this perfect baby.

JSG



So this is why you want all to believe that Don Burney is the new savior, taking Jesus place?

05-24-2007 12:59 AM
Find all posts by this user
jon
Member


Posts: 65
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #13
RE: Jesus bloodline

Angellynn Wrote:

Jah's Slave Girl Wrote:

Angellynn Wrote:
If Mary carried the baby for nine months and it used her blood to flourish and grow , he would have to have her genes and DNA. It was Jehovah who made Him perfect.


That is totally incorrect.

First off we have to recognize, the baby's genes and DNA DO NOT, I repeat do not come from circulating blood, but are imprints in the cell, both egg cell and sperm cell.

Also I checked a source written by a physician to see whether the mother's blood passed through the placenta to the embryo and learned that it does not. So the baby develops with a separate circulatory system separate from the mother who carries the baby. All of this shows how a "surrogate" mother doesn't actually contribute anything to the actual formation of the baby, DNA wise, blood wise or any other way, thus making the "surrogate" mother just a temporary incubator of sorts, carrying the baby till birth.

The book is Your Pregnancy, week by week, by Dr. Glade B. Curtis, OB/GYN and Judith Scheeler, MS, 5th edition, page 110.

They write that "circulation is separate fetal blood does not mix with your mother's blood."

There are many other sources that can be checked if you disagree with this statement.

Interesting, Psalms 139:16 speaks of Jesus' miraculous formation as being in the "embryo" state. Of course, all of this would occur in the womb of Mary (and not within the fallopian tube as would be in conception where sperm and egg unite). No but instead the actual starting point of Jesus' existence on earth as a human was actually in the EMBRYO STATE, where he would be placed in the womb of Mary. Meaning, Jehovah simply implanted the "embryo" of Jesus in Mary simply making her a "surrogate" mother only in his sight. Accordingly, Mary contributed no DNA, blood or anything else to the formation of this perfect baby.

JSG



So this is why you want all to believe that Don Burney is the new savior, taking Jesus place?


Yes that is what they believe!

05-24-2007 07:51 PM
Find all posts by this user
man hu
Babe and any other piggy names


Posts: 2,498
Group: Moderator
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #14
RE: Jesus bloodline

On the Living Waters forum it looks like they apply Isaiah 49:5,6 to Donald Burney,"The YORRW 'Bible Academy' Registrar".

5 And now Jehovah, the One forming me from the belly as a servant belonging to him, has said [for me] to bring back Jacob to him, in order that to him Israel itself may be gathered. And I shall be glorified in the eyes of Jehovah, and my own God will have become my strength.  And he proceeded to say: “It has been more than a trivial matter for you to become my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to bring back even the safeguarded ones of Israel; I also have given you for a light of the nations, that my salvation may come to be to the extremity of the earth.”

Strange Watchman didn't deny "a Watchman I have made you" might have a literal application in him.

Eze. 2:17 "Son of man, a watchman is what I have made you to the house of Israel, and you must hear from my mouth speech and you must warn them from me"

Some old guys in Bethel have decided they are the faithful and discreet slave.

Matt. 24:45 “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?

Some people suffer with delusions of grandeur :king: :queen:

So we have servants, watchmen and faithful and discreet slaves now walking the earth with us mere mortals
I think I ought to scour the Bible for a suitable title, I am sure it must prophesy about me somewhere in the good pages.


I feel something regal would suit me. Kings, princes, princesses. Oh I forgot, the title prince has also been assigned too.

Who would not want to benefit from the grand arrangement of oversight that our Leader has instituted in the Christian congregation? The prophet Isaiah foretold its blessings, saying: “Look! A king will reign for righteousness itself; and as respects princes, they will rule as princes for justice itself. And each one must prove to be like a hiding place from the wind and a place of concealment from the rainstorm, like streams of water in a waterless country, like the shadow of a heavy crag in an exhausted land.” (Isaiah 32:1, 2) Each one of the elders is to be such “a place” of protection and safety. Even if submitting to authority is difficult for us, let us prayerfully apply ourselves to being obedient and submissive to the divinely constituted authority within the congregation.

I am currently torn between taking on the name Og king of Bashan or maybe I should call myself Nergalsharezer the Rabmag but I think Rabmag was a prince too!
Oh well King Og it will have to be. Og I said not Kong!

Sorry Manirus (Paradise College of Theology Registrar) you will have to find another great title for yourself, I have royally bagged that one




Numbers 32:33 At this Moses gave to them, that is, to the sons of Gad and to the sons of Reu´ben and to half the tribe of Ma·nas´seh the son of Joseph, the kingdom of Si´hon the king of the Am´or·ites and the kingdom of Og the king of Ba´shan, the land belonging to its cities in the territories, and the cities of the land round about.
Jeremiah 39:2 In the eleventh year of Zed·e·ki´ah, in the fourth month, on the ninth day of the month, the city was broken through. 3 And all the princes of the king of Babylon proceeded to come in and sit down in the Middle Gate, [namely,] Ner´gal-shar·e´zer, Sam´gar-ne´bo, Sar´se·chim, Rab´sa·ris, Ner´gal-shar·e´zer the Rab´mag and all the rest of the princes of the king of Babylon


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1sj2gQJIKI
05-25-2007 04:27 AM
Find all posts by this user
Jah's Slave Girl
Unregistered


Post: #15
RE: Jesus bloodline

Quote:
So this is why you want all to believe that Don Burney is the new savior, taking Jesus place?


No one replaces a perfect sinless sacrifice [Jesus] with a sinner, who is a BLOODLINE descendant of Adam and Eve [Don Burney]. Simple.

Jehovah God knows the difference between a sinner and a perfect person, I think.

You are trying to compare apples & oranges...two (2) different covenant arrangements that Jehovah leads His People ... from one to another one that is acceptable to Him, in these last days, as bible prophecy reveals. (Jeremiah 50:4, 5)

It would be like trying to compare God's arrangement with Moses [imperfect man], when he led the nation of Israel into an acceptable covenant arrangement with Jehovah. God used a sinner to accomplish this, the bible tells us.

However, we must remember, the true identity of Babylon The Great is a "mystery" [Greek: mysterion]. Therefore, when Jehovah's witnesses finally figure exactly who Babylon The Great is in our modern times, then they will begin to understand exactly who Donald Burney is, prophetically-speaking. -- Isaiah 49:5, 6

Jah's Slave Girl

05-25-2007 08:33 AM
Pages (6): « First [1] 2 3 4 5 Next > Last »

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this Thread | Add Thread to Favorites

Forum Jump: