apologetic value of blood types


#1

The crying statues are of blood type O

blood miracles are of blood type AB

But, it is impossible for a parent type O to produce a child type AB

Now, if Jesus is simply a special creation without any DNA from Mary, would this be proof of the incarnation or virgin birth?

And, based on the evolution of blood types, AB did not exist until the 1500’s. Why else would God make Jesus AB execpt to prove that he was a special creation without any DNA from Mary?

A + O = A
A + B = AB
O + B = B

:thumbsup:


#2

NO! If he didn’t have DNA from Mary then he wouldn’t be both Human and Divine - other words you are presenting a Heresy -


#3

Hate to tell you all this but I know about this subject contrary to popular belief A child does not necessarily take a type from the mother or the father though in 99.9 percent it does.

My daughter was born with 0 neg blood I have A positive blood her dad has A neg (and no there were no sanchos or boyfriends outside of my marriage) I was going to college and was taking biology at the time and my daughter got to be a research subject. We found that the probability of her having my grandmothers blood type was something in the area of 1:1,000.000.000. It does happen. And by the way at the time of christs birth there was no such thing as DNA samples or blood typing so how is it we know what Jesus’s blood type was anyway??? Science proves a norm so if my daughter could take the seriously recessive gene for o neg blood it stand to reason god can pretty much do anything even breaking a norm


#4

Where did you come up with the fact that AB did not exist until the 1500s?


#5

I am seeing both bad theology and bad science. Here is the deal on blood types.

Each chromosome is a pair, one side from each parent. Thus there are two genes that determine blood group and two genes that determine positive/negative (and every other genetic characteristic).

This is often expressed a phenotype and genotype. The phenotype is the effective blood type and is designated by a single letter. The genotype represents what genes you really have and is represented by two letters, one from each parent. One gene is always dominant and one is always recesive. In some cases, there can be mixture of dominants resulting in co-dominants.

So here are the blood types.

A is dominant.
B is dominant
O is recessive

Positive (+) is dominant
Negative (-) is recessive.

Phenotype A+
Potential genotypes: AA and AO, ++ or ±

Phenotype A-
Potential genotypes: AA and AO, – only

Phenotype B+
Potential genotypes: BB and BO, ++ or ±

Phenotype B-
Potential genotypes: BB and BO, – only

Phenotype AB+
Potential genotypes: AB only, ++ or ±

Phenotype AB-
Potential genotypes: AB only, – only

Phenotype O+
Potential genotypes: OO only, , ++ or ±

Phenotype O+
Potential genotypes: OO only, , – only

One can deduce the geno types of the parent from the phenotype of the children. And even what the genotype of the child may be as well.

Example: Father is A+, Mother is B-. Child has O+ blood.

Therefore:
Father’s genotype AO, ++ or ±.
Mother’s genotype BO, –

Genotype of mother’s egg O-
Genotype of father’s sperm O+

Therefore the son must have a genotype of OO, ±

Despite what s4angel has said, children always, 100% of the time with absolutely zero exceptions since the beginning of the universe get their blood types from their parents.

By the way, I happen to know the above example is true because this is my family and we have all been tested.

As for the theology, 1/2 of Jesus’ DNA cam from Mary. The other half came via (net necessarily from) the Holy Spirit and is of miraculous origin.


#6

That one brought it back. Yep I have been corrected.


#7

so correct me if I am wrong here (as I know you will:D ) If a parent has A+ and the Father B- and the child has 0- then the rececive gene would have had to have been with the gene which is not normaly shown of A0±. keep in mind when we did this study I only had my type from my pregnancy blood work of A+ and the fathers blood work from his physical of B-. So my study probably was not based on good information as a base. They actualy typed the blood from the statues??? where can I see that info?


#8

The Rh factor (pos/neg) is inherited separately from ABO blood types. Rh negative is recessive and Rh positive is dominant. So just like A or B plus A or B parent can produce an O child, so can two Rh positive parents produce an Rh negative child.

For an A mother and B (or A) father to produce an O child is 1:4 assuming genotypes (AO and BO or AO). Same with both parents having an Rh positive phenotype.:thumbsup:

Our family genetics are less interesting since we’re all O. I’m O negative, though. My mother was O negative as was her mother. My father was O positive. My husband is O positive and all our children are…surprise! O positive.:stuck_out_tongue:


#9

All of Jesus’ DNA came from Mary.

That’s my story, and I’m stickin’ to it.


#10

[quote=rpp;2557912
]via
[/quote]

(net necessarily from) the Holy Spirit and is of miraculous origin.

Since the spirit is without DNA wouldn’t it be simpler for all DNA to come from Mary as in parthenogenesis? The miracle would be that the child was a boy. :slight_smile:


#11

I’m inclined to think that Jesus also had Joseph’s bloodline,although Joseph and Mary did not have marital relations.
If Jesus only had Mary’s bloodline he would not,perhaps,be fully human. And also,Jesus was the Son of David. Joseph’s geneology is given in Matthew and Luke,and he was a descendant of David,but Mary’s geneology is not given. I think that Jesus was genetically the Son of David as well as in a figurative or spiritual sense.


#12

Actually, the genealogy in Luke is Mary’s.
From the Web Bible Encyclopedia:

Mary was a direct descendant of King David which gave Jesus the right to ascend the Jewish throne, both through Mary and through adoption by his foster father, Joseph. Mary’s genealogy is supplied in Luke 3:23-38. Dr. Henry Morris explains the genealogy in Luke:

“Joseph was clearly the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16, so this verse [Luke 3:23 - says “son of Heli”] should be understood to mean “son-in-law of Heli.” Thus, the genealogy of Christ in Luke is actually the genealogy of Mary, while Matthew gives that of Joseph. Actually, the word “son” is not in the original, so it would be legitimate to supply either “son” or “son-in-law” in this context. Since Matthew and Luke clearly record much common material, it is certain that neither one could unknowingly incorporate such a flagrant apparent mistake as the wrong genealogy in his record. As it is, however, the two genealogies show that both parents were descendants of David—Joseph through Solomon (Matthew 1:7-15), thus inheriting the legal right to the throne of David, and Mary through Nathan (Luke 3:23-31), her line thus carrying the seed of David, since Solomon’s line had been refused the throne because of Jechoniah’s sin” [Dr. Henry M. Morris, The Defender’s Study Bible, note for Luke 3:23 (Iowa Falls, Iowa: World Publishing, Inc., 1995).].  

Paul


#13

I’m not sure about that.


#14

Hmm, theres another bit of issue here. Not all statues that have cried have cried O type fluid. See members.aol.com/bjw1106/marian8.htm. Apparently the tears at Akita were of type AB and B, O as well. members.tripod.com/~BobStanley/akita.htm

Also, the Eucharistic miracle at Lanciano (therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html) both the blood and flesh are of type AB.

**(I’ve forgotten my sources for these bits here, so take what you will and leave the rest) **
We know that blood type AB is a hybrid blood type (probably occurring when middle easterners and Europeans began to marry).
We also know that type B blood occurs most prominently in middle eastern populations.
Type A is of a Mediterranean origin.

So, logic would seem so say that since Jesus is type AB (according to Lanciano and the Shroud of Turin) and Mary is type B (educated guess really) we’re left with the only bit of useful apologetical information from this exercise: God has blood type A. Only really useful if you’re wanting to “prove” that God is Italian :stuck_out_tongue:


#15

You can be sure. The Luke genealogy is different than the Matthew genealogy. It is most assuredly Mary’s

As for the source of both side of the DNA, I am sticking with what I said before. Half from Mary and half, via the Holy Spirit, from a miraculous source.

Parthenogenesis, which results in a clone of the parent, played absolutely no part in it. Besides, no mammal is capable of parthenogenesis.


#16

In your example:
Mother’s genotype must be as you said, AO, ±.
The Father’s genotype must be BO, –
The child received O- from dad and O- from mom.

Also, I am not certain what you mean by typing blood from statues. Can you elaborate? Was this in reference to a miraculous event? I would like to know more. :slight_smile:


#17

Correct. There has been no record of parthenogenesis in mammals. It would be a Miracle if it was. :slight_smile:

Therefore, it is at least as miraculously possible as your suggestion.


#18

Obviously, Mary’s XX chromosomes contained the male-defining segment of the Y chromosome transposed within them. But this male-defining segment was suppressed in Mary’s genome. It was active, though, in Jesus. So, Jesus’ XX chromosomes were distinct, in that they contain bits of crucial segments of the Y chromosome. So, Jesus’ lineage should include Mary’s maternal lineage, and Mary’s paternal lineage.

Perhaps Mary’s unique XX profile was a result of her immaculate conception?

(Notice that our X chromosomes are in the form of a ‘cross’, and our Y chromosomes are in the form of a ‘dove’.:D)


#19

Or the Holy Spirit simply created Jesus fully human Romans 8:3

:thumbsup:


#20

Not all statues that have cried have cried O type fluid. See members.aol.com/bjw1106/marian8.htm. Apparently the tears at Akita were of type AB and B, O as well. members.tripod.com/~BobStanley/akita.htm

Also, the Eucharistic miracle at Lanciano (therealpresence.org/eucha…/lanciano.html) both the blood and flesh are of type AB.

Now, if those tears really are Mary’s one would expect a consistency in blood type. From the evolution of blood types which has been proven to be correct via scientific methods, it is likely that type O is correct for Jewish people in Jesus’ day.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.