Miracles are, by definition, events which defy natural scientific laws. If so, then it would be a violation of natural law.
The Bible clearly puts out the claim that the birth of Jesus was miraculous. Can science disprove the virgin birth? The simple answer is definitely not. All also believe that he was male, and therefore, discovery on the Shroud of Turin that he was male would add nothing to the question of his virgin birth. First of all, Jesus was a real person, as all scholars and historians of any standing, including atheists and members of non-Christian religions. Would this disprove the virgin birth? Of course it would not. Let us assume that this was the actual burial shroud of Jesus, that we have his blood and we have proof that he had both an X and a Y chromosome. Unless we have reason to believe that the biological samples left on the Shroud of Turin are from the actual person Jesus of Nazareth (and we have no such reason that I know of), then the evidence you claim is irrelevant to establishing or disproving the virgin birth. So, again, your premise is really pretty much nonsense, if I can say that with a kind spirit. Next, even if we could accept that this piece of cloth was indeed two thousand years old (not true) and even if we could assume that it had scientific evidence of an AB type blood (also certainly not true) and even if it contained actual physical evidence that the person was male (also certainly not true), then how would we know that this was the actual blood of Jesus? Obviously, this would be completely impossible to establish. So for a third and fourth reason your premise that this could somehow disprove the virgin birth is groundless. These materials do not last for 2000 years except in extremely rare circumstances. There is virtually zero chance (I am tempted to say that there is zero chance, but…) that they have found actual blood cells with recognizable AB blood type or with recognizable XY chromosomes. (The reason I say I am skeptical is that the Shroud has been tested twice and the results have been published in reliable journals, putting the age at about 750 years, not 2000) If that were true, then there is virtually a zero chance that they have found DNA or chromosomes on this cloth.
Shroud of turin new evidence plus#
Let me assume that the cloth in the cathedral in Turin is 2000 years old, plus or minus three hundred years. However, for the sake of argument, let me assume something that I believe is almost certainly not true. I believe that the source you are using is unreliable. If this were true, then I almost certainly would have heard about it. Is there any solution to the virgin birth in light of modern science? Thanks.įirst of all, I an EXTREMELY skeptical of the claim that new evidence proves the Shroud of Turin to be in the range of 300 BC and AD 300. Where did the Y chromosome come from? If God is an immaterial being, how could he have randomly created the Y chromosomes and additional 23 chromosomes to constitute the 46 chromosomes needed for an embryo out of nothing? If all things that begin to exist require a cause, surely these 23 chromosome needed to make up all 46 chromosomes require a biological origin. As a result the blood found on the Shroud was type AB, and had both X and Y chromosomes.
Do DNA tests prove Jesus had two human parents? Recently the Shroud of Turin has been re-dated within the range of 300 BC to 300 AD.
0 kommentar(er)
