Jesus' genome


(Cindy) #42

I’m not following you. Are you suggesting that God transforms into a biological creature when he enters our time/space? Why? Further, what does it even mean for God to enter into our space/time? I mean, what does that look like? Does he actually move like we do? Something tells me not.

Yes, I agree that the incarnation is central to the Christian belief. As beaglelady correctly stated; the exact mechanics of how it happened is a mystery.


(Cindy) #43

Thanks! I’ll take a look in just a bit.


(Stephen Matheson) #44

I wasn’t trying to explain it but there isn’t anything more to say than this: Christians believe that god has a genome, because Christians are by definition trinitarians who assert the incarnation as basic belief. Personally, I don’t think it needs to be “explained,” because we’re talking about things (namely gods) that don’t have explanations. If god wants to become a human, then POOF he’s a human. I’m afraid I don’t see why that should be any more impossible than being god in the first place.


(Mitchell W McKain) #45

All living things have a spirit. But not all living things have a human spirit. What is the difference? The human mind is the difference. When does that begin? This is not absolutely clear. But the one solid scientific fact is that brain activity starts around the 20th week of pregnancy. So before that? I do not believe the fetus has a human spirit any more than a tumor has a human spirit. It is just biological material and no more. Yes there is potential for human life but the same is true of every sperm and egg – so this is not relevant.

In conclusion, it is very possible that newborn babies do have a mind and thus a human spirit, and I am all for playing safe with the most conservative guess. But before the 20th week there is no objective rational reason for a belief in the presence of a human spirit, no more than a belief in fairies and ghosts. By all means believe in these things if want (and live your life accordingly if you choose), but it isn’t reasonable to expect other people to agree with you (or expect them to live according to your own fetishes and whatnot).


(Cindy) #46

No, Christians do not believe that God has a genome. I am a Christian and I do not believe that. Again, the incarnation (as is the Trinity) are accepted to be mysteries.


(Stephen Matheson) #47

I don’t see how you can believe in the incarnation if you don’t think that god (aka Jesus) has a genome. Maybe I’m not being clear, or maybe you don’t believe that Jesus ascended into heaven. If you believe in the incarnation, and the ascension, then you automatically believe there is a human body in heaven. And that means a genome. I was a Christian for decades and I believed that god has a genome, that he HAS to have one, because of the incarnation and the ascension.


(Cindy) #48

Ah… Jesus-yes; as human he would have a genome. God the Father, no.

Yes, but but… they are one in the same per Trinity doctrine! Indeed. Tis a mystery!

Not one that we’ll solve here or any time soon, to be sure.


(Phil) #49

And his genome would be that of a typical middle Eastern male,so ordinary that it required Judas to pick him out of the crowd.


#50

But first you said, “I believe in a spirit which is a creation of our choices in life.”

So at what point can a baby make choices? Aren’t you just winging it?

btw, I don’t expect agreement here. And just what fetishes do you think I have?


(Stephen Matheson) #51

Aye, and there’s Isaiah 53:1-2.


(Mitchell W McKain) #52

All living things make choices. It is part of the very nature of life as a self-organizing phenomenon. The human mind is the same.

Like I said above… ALL living things have a spirit. The question is when is this a human spirit and that requires a mind. And a mind requires a functioning human brain… which requires brain activity.

That depends on how you define “winging it”. I am not God and I am not omniscient. But do I have good reasons for what I believe? VERY! For example, shall we talk about the mathematics behind this in chaotic dynamics which show how choices happen in complex systems? The point is that you can ask for whatever details which might interest you.

I don’t even care to imagine. The point is that subjective religious beliefs with no objective evidence might well be compared to some bizarre fetish because there is no basis for a reasonable expectation that others should agree with you. It only has relevance to your own PERSONAL life.


#53

What choices does a newborn make?


(Mitchell W McKain) #54

Whether to cry right now… whether to reach out for the light it sees… whether to move any of the muscles he/she has access to… They start learning right away and the learning process depends on trying new things.

But why talk about after they are born? How about the choices they make before they are born, when they kick or not? How do they respond to the noises they hear? When they hear their mothers voice or her feel her body move, how does that make them feel? Do some think something like… “I think therefore I am” in some way without words, I do not know, but it could be… When the baby is born, does the baby play any part in that decision? I don’t know, but it seems possible to me. People are different. Every child is different and not just in trivial ways. Ask any parent.


#55

The things a newborn does cannot be considered choices in any meaningful way. He doesn’t think, “I could cry right now, or I could be quiet.”

But you also claimed that all living things make choices. Only in higher animals is that possible. A pathogen doesn’t “decide” to infect another organism, or multiply, etc. Not in any meaningful way.


(Shawn T Murphy) #56

[content removed by moderator] Please read Caroline Eliacheff’s work. She is a baby psychologist and will support the fact that babies are 100% cognizant and only lack the ability to communicate. She devoted her life to understanding their nonverbal language and treat them as adults with amazing results.

This is more evidence of the preexistence of the soul because she shows how much babies know before they can speak.


(Randy) #57

This opens a huge can of worms. What is Heaven? A physical place? Why on earth would we have the ascension in Scripture unless they believed that heaven was a physical place to the atmosphere-and-above-ward of Israel? Do we really think we take a physical body to a physical place?

Interesting stuff. And it gets more confusing the more we know about the body and space. Lewis wrote a bit about it that sort of gives a wiggle room. But it seems to me that there’s a great deal of debate into what the ascension even means.

It all leads me to throw up my hands and say “who really knows;” and I don’t honestly think it’s that important. It does tell us a bit about the filter of 1st century ANE consciousness and cosmology, I think. Enjoyed your article. Thanks.


(Stephen Matheson) #58

I don’t know her work, but if those are her conclusions, then she is mistaken about cognitive development.


(Randy) #59

We can go another way–some have said none of us has any sort of choice. I don’t think we have great insight into it yet!


(Stephen Matheson) #60

Well, I don’t think it “opens” the can of worms. It just shines a light on it. The can of worms includes this intense insistence that gods can’t be physical, that physical and “spiritual” are antithetical/incompatible/whatever, etc. These are just new ways of asking questions and confronting “errors” that existed from the first generation of Christianity. The incarnation is a resounding answer to many of those questions, and the ascension, long ignored, was important enough to be chiseled into every major creed. I would suggest that your discomfort could be more about inherited gnosticism (the American religion, according to Harold Bloom) and modern cleavage between “spiritual” and “physical” things than it is about any particularly thorny philosophical challenge.


(Shawn T Murphy) #61

Early childhood development is a long way from fully understood. Her work is ground breaking with documented results.

I just had dinner with a child psychologist and he says 80% of his time is spent fixing mental damage done in the first year where baby’s are helpless and cannot express their needs.