| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Ninure Saunders" |
| Date: |
29 Apr 2004 08:04:44 AM |
| Object: |
(~) CLONING THE SON OF GOD? |
(~) CLONING THE SON OF GOD?
Several years ago, several news agencies reported the efforts of a group
to clone Jesus Christ. The goal of this group was best stated in their own
words:
"The Second Coming Project is a not-for-profit organization devoted to
bringing about the Second Coming of Our Lord, Jesus Christ, as prophesied
in the Bible, in time for the 2,000th anniversary of his birth. Our
intention is to clone Jesus....by taking an incorrupt cell from one of the
many Holy Relics of Jesus' blood and body that are preserved in churches
throughout the world, extracting its DNA, and inserting into an
unfertilized human egg....The fertilized egg, now the zygote of Jesus
Christ, will be implanted into the womb of a young virginal woman (who has
volunteered of her own accord), who will then bring the baby Jesus to term
in a second Virgin Birth.
"If all goes according to plan, the birth will take place on December 25,
2001, thus making Anno Domini 2001 into Anno Domini Novi 1, and all
calendrical calculations will begin anew......
"No longer can we rely on hope and prayer, waiting around futilely for
Jesus to return. We have the technology to bring him back right now: there
is no reason, moral, legal or Biblical, not to take advantage of it."
(source: the now defunct http://www.clonejesus.com/)
This group in California claimed to be soliciting contributions to fund
their effort. When I first heard of this, I thought it was a joke. It HAD
to be a joke. And, fortunately, it turned out to be just that.
There are a lot of things which disturbed me about the thought of taking
it seriously. Setting aside for a moment the morality of human cloning and
the questionable authenticity of the "holy relics", there seems to be an
even greater issue at the heart of all this.
Do we really believe that the uniqueness of Jesus Christ was bound up in
his DNA? That what made him special was found in his chromosomes? That we
can "create" God if we just have the right genetic code? I can think of
few things more foolish.
Jesus was indeed human -- every bit as human as we are. But what made him
special, what made him unique, was his Godhood, and that is something
which will never be created in a test tube.
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on
earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or
principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.
And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist." (Col.
1:15-17)
Oh, and by the way, our wait for the return of Jesus Christ is not in the
least bit futile. He is quite capable of returning just as he promised he
would, without our assistance. When I look around at a world which refuses
to acknowledge Christ for who he really was, I pray that it will be soon.
Have a great day!
Alan Smith
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
http://Rainbow-Christian.tk
The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
My latest Poll
Who would Jesus vote for?
http://www.network54.com/Hide/Votelet/34458
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
My Online Diary
http://www.ninure.deardiary.net
-
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
.
|
|
| User: "John Ings" |
|
| Title: Re: (~) CLONING THE SON OF GOD? |
29 Apr 2004 07:54:00 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 13:04:44 GMT,
RainbowChristiannohate@Rainbow-Christian.tk (Ninure Saunders) wrote:
Jesus was indeed human -- every bit as human as we are. But what made him
special, what made him unique, was his Godhood, and that is something
which will never be created in a test tube.
But which is easily created in the imagination of the devout.
Oh, and by the way, our wait for the return of Jesus Christ is not in the
least bit futile.
Don't hold your breath though.
He is quite capable of returning just as he promised he
would, without our assistance. When I look around at a world which refuses
to acknowledge Christ for who he really was, I pray that it will be soon.
So you can gloat?
"That the saints may enjoy their beatitude and the grace of God more
abundantly, they are permitted to see the punishment of the damned in
hell" Saint Thomas Aquinas declared. That what you're anticipating?
Basically what you're proposing Ninure is a hide-and-seek deity who
coyly refuses to provide man with credible evidence, but who is
willing to see billions tormented for failing to acknowledge the
flatulent pontifications of certain prelates. Now can you really blame
me for taking that to be a story prepounded by said prelates?
If your Christ wants to be acknowledged for "who he really was" then
he should quit acting like Oral Roberts and Kent Hovind.
## An honest god is the noblest work of man....
.
|
|
|
| User: "NathanHalcyon" |
|
| Title: Re: (~) CLONING THE SON OF GOD? |
03 May 2004 11:04:12 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 17:54:00 -0700, John Ings <nodamned@spam.org>
wrote:
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 13:04:44 GMT,
RainbowChristiannohate@Rainbow-Christian.tk (Ninure Saunders) wrote:
Jesus was indeed human -- every bit as human as we are. But what made him
special, what made him unique, was his Godhood, and that is something
which will never be created in a test tube.
But which is easily created in the imagination of the devout.
Oh, and by the way, our wait for the return of Jesus Christ is not in the
least bit futile.
Don't hold your breath though.
He is quite capable of returning just as he promised he
would, without our assistance. When I look around at a world which refuses
to acknowledge Christ for who he really was, I pray that it will be soon.
So you can gloat?
"That the saints may enjoy their beatitude and the grace of God more
abundantly, they are permitted to see the punishment of the damned in
hell" Saint Thomas Aquinas declared. That what you're anticipating?
Basically what you're proposing Ninure is a hide-and-seek deity who
coyly refuses to provide man with credible evidence,
What is credible evidence? A dog-and-pony show? Should God
dance and sing to a Vaudeville tune to dispell your incredulity?
Lordly, royal behavior indeed!
It is a baleful facade to hide behind, to insist that only
evidence of modern empirical methodologies be the means to establish
the answer to the question of God's existence. The vary fabric of
reality attests to God's existence. The intrinsic spirituality of Man
implies God's existence. Why is Man superstitious? Why does he
singularly lack the instinctual behaviors that compel all other animal
life? Naturally, these questions have incontrovertible answers
arrived at by scientific empiricism, don't they?
but who is
willing to see billions tormented for failing to acknowledge the
flatulent pontifications of certain prelates. Now can you really blame
me for taking that to be a story prepounded by said prelates?
If your Christ wants to be acknowledged for "who he really was" then
he should quit acting like Oral Roberts and Kent Hovind.
If only Man would act like Christ! What of His [Christ's] tenets are
objectionable? Perhaps one should inquire of the ignominious Thomas
Jefferson?
## An honest god is the noblest work of man....
And the more-educated-than-thou will not necessarily inherit the
Earth.
Proving the negative on the Cartesian Coordinate system,
Hector
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Ings" |
|
| Title: Re: (~) CLONING THE SON OF GOD? |
04 May 2004 07:41:55 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 03 May 2004 23:04:12 -0500, NathanHalcyon
<jpjccd@psbnewton.com> wrote:
Basically what you're proposing Ninure is a hide-and-seek deity who
coyly refuses to provide man with credible evidence,
What is credible evidence? A dog-and-pony show?
Like water into wine and loaves and fishes? No, that's just the kind
of dog and pony show that ISN'T evidence.
Should God
dance and sing to a Vaudeville tune to dispell your incredulity?
No, he should provide even just one piece of credible evidence.
Evidence that is indisputable, that can be examined and re-examined.
Not some ephemeral miracle witnessed by hysterical faithful.
Lordly, royal behavior indeed!
Blather! According to the Bible, God used to indulge in all sorts of
demonstrations of his power; murdering thousands of innocents to
impress Pharaohs; parting the Red Sea and stopping the sun in the sky.
But now there are some scientists around with instrumentation, these
wonders have suddenly ceased. Could it be they were just tall tales?
It is a baleful facade to hide behind, to insist that only
evidence of modern empirical methodologies be the means to establish
the answer to the question of God's existence.
The question under discussion is not merely God's existance, but God's
nature as the Bible describes him and Ninure imagines him.
The vary fabric of reality attests to God's existence.
MAY attest to the existence of some creating power. A debatable issue,
but not the one we are addressing here in this thread. It is Ninure's
loving, forgiving, salvation-offering deity that I'm asking testimony
for.
The intrinsic spirituality of Man implies God's existence.
Craves God's existence. And invents gods by the dozen to satisfy that
craving. But where's the proof any of them are real?
Why is Man superstitious?
Because he's only a few thousand years out of the caves of the last
ice age.
Why does he
singularly lack the instinctual behaviors that compel all other animal
life?
He doesn't. Don't kid yourself about that.
Naturally, these questions have incontrovertible answers
arrived at by scientific empiricism, don't they?
Yes.
but who is
willing to see billions tormented for failing to acknowledge the
flatulent pontifications of certain prelates. Now can you really blame
me for taking that to be a story prepounded by said prelates?
If your Christ wants to be acknowledged for "who he really was" then
he should quit acting like Oral Roberts and Kent Hovind.
If only Man would act like Christ!
No thank you. We no longer condone slavery for instance, an
institution that Christ never spoke out against. Nor do our courts
propose that an innocent person to be allowed to suffer a guilty
person's punishment. And we like to see our rulers appointed by the
people, not our priesthood in the name of our deity.
What of His [Christ's] tenets are objectionable?
Original sin.
The Divine Right of Kings
The Atonement.
Salvation.
And in particular this demand for belief without proof!
Perhaps one should inquire of the ignominious Thomas
Jefferson?
Very well:
"The Christian god can easily be pictured as virtually the same god as
the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a
three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to
know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs
to look at the caliber of people who say they serve him. They are
always of two classes: fools and hypocrites." -- Thomas Jefferson
## An honest god is the noblest work of man....
And the more-educated-than-thou will not necessarily inherit the
Earth.
Yes, perhaps it will be the sanctemoneously devout. It's happened
before. It took a thousand years for western civilization to pull out
of such any abyss of superstitious ignorance the last time!
## Man cannot make even a microbe, but invents gods by the dozen
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
