Skip to the content
Icon of Christ
› ›

This needs expert analysis

Unknown
edited December 1969 in Non-Orthodox Inquiries
While surfing the web I found this peculiar page, a first time read.
http://www.arkdiscovery.com/aoc-1.htm

Any chances at least some of this is true? Someone please advise me.
Perhaps Iqbal would enlighten me?

GBU

Comments

  • john_paul_elia
    it is very intersting. However, it is very hard to comment.
  • mmatt95mmatt95
    Very interesting indeed. I especially find this part interesting and wonder whether an official objective commentary on this DNA investigation is available.

    Mr. Wyatt removed a sample of Christ's blood from the crack in the ceiling of the cave and paid a lab in Israel to do an analysis of the blood.  They put the dark dried-out substance in saline solution for 72 hours.  Mr. Wyatt asked them to do a chromosome test, but they informed him that he was wasting his money since you can't do a chromosome test on dead white blood cells.  They proceeded with the analysis and said, "It's your money."  As they began viewing the cells under the electron microscope, they saw cells dividing before their eyes!  The blood was alive!  They couldn't believe what they were seeing!    They continued with their tests and found the blood to be unique from any other blood!  Each cell contains only 24 chromosomes compared to the normal count of 46 that you and I have.  Christ received 23 chromosomes from Mary, and one "y" chromosome from His heavenly Father to designate a male child.  Others in the lab were asked to come see for themselves.  With tears in their eyes they asked whose blood this was, and Mr. Wyatt replied, "It is the blood of your Messiah."  Then they asked who the Messiah was.  No other male human being has ever had this same chromosome count!  Christ's blood is alive and unique to prove His divinity to the world before He returns to this earth.  When these tests are repeated for all the world to see, everyone will learn that Jesus was more than a preacher, He was and is the Son of God!

  • Meena_AmeenMeena_Ameen
    wow this is amazingg... does anyone know when this article came out????
  • Unknown
    It really is quite moving, but I am not quite sure how factual it is.

    Ron Wyatt was an amateur archaeologist who had no particular training in the field (although miracles need no training), but for such reasons, his claims are dismissed by historians, scientists, Bible scholars, and most Christian leaders.

    I have no particular knowledge of our church commenting on his work, but I know it's pretty much neglected.

    Regardless, he is recognized by some people out there. I wouldn't dwell on it too much. His work will probably never be formally recognized as scientific fact.

    http://www.wyattmuseum.com/

    P.S. Mr. Wyatt's research has been out there for quite some time. He passed away in 1999.

    Pray for me.
  • Unknown
    We have got to cosider a few points:
    1- Is the source reliable.
    2- Is there enough evidence to support this.
    3- Is there visual proof of this.

    Well
    1- The source isn't very reliable. It lacks a certain proof. It has a lot of proof but there is not enough proof.
    2- No there isn't. Where is the evidence in it. The article is made up of a lot of discriptions of the place but a little evidece is provided.
     
    3- There is no visual proof read this quote from the second page.

    Many people have asked for proof of Ron's finding the ark.  Ron says we should wait until the Lord wants it revealed.  He had taken hundreds of photos using 35mm, Polaroid, and video but they are were blurred because God did not want Ron to be showing this evidence at that time.  Ron knew then that he was to wait until the Lord's time.  Subsequently he was able to get clear photos of the ark.

    What could we make of that.
    Pray 4 me
    ps. I know that I sound like a history teacher but oh well.
  • Unknown
    Thank you for all the very interesting replies.

    What worries me most is the alleged DNA lab test: the results are clearly not reliable. Now we all know that Jesus was complete in His Manhood like us and not short of anything (but sin). Plus if you research in the internet, I checked that haploid cells (cells with half the number of chromosomes in nuclei, aka DNA ) are incompatible with life and short lived, while the Lord is Life.

    Please give more replies when you have the time. GBU
  • Unknown
    Remember that Christ is full in humanity and also full in divinity. He is simply God. The point is although he is similar to us, he is different  in many things. When Christ was incarnated, half of his genes came from his mother (The pure ever virgin St Mary) and the other 'genes' came from his heavenly father (himself due to the holy trinity). We don't know the number of genes that came from his heavenly father. We just know that he lived. Anyway we really don't need to know anything about his DNA. If we knew it won't change our beliefs or if we didn't know it still won't change our beliefs. It won't help in the salvation of our souls.
    Pray 4 me.
  • Anglican
    I suspect we need to be careful on this one.

    No doubt Mr. Wyatt was a well-intentioned man, but as is the case with many Protestant evangelicals he puts forward hypotheses as though they were fact. The proof that he was examining the tomb of Our Lord is wanting, and the 'scientific' examination of the DNA is frankly not credible.

    The Church teaches that he was fully-human and fully-divine; the notion that this means he had only half the requisite number of DNA cells is close to the Nestorian heresy of 'two Sons'. There was one hypostasis on the Incarnate Word, and there is no reason the body of Jesus would not have had the correct amount of DNA; indeed, given the creed of the Church that He was like unto us in everything save for sin, he would have had to have had to correct amount of DNA.

    The Church teaches that there was no intermingling of the natures, so it is unorthodox and probably heretical to claim that He had only half the amount of DNA with the rest being made up of something else. I am afraid that the Christology which would follow from this man's conclusions is unorthodox and therefore wrong; the science I shall leave those better qualified to comment on.

    In Christ,

    Anglian
  • Unknown
    Thank you for your valuable replies.

    If I may, I strongly agree with you Anglian. Your point regarding the DNA analysis issue that was allegedly performed on Christ's blood cells (that were allegedly recovered from below the Crucifixion site) is the more logical one.
  • Unknown
    + We are forgetting one thing here. Notice how he claims that the tomb of christ is the Garden tomb and  that the crucifixion site of Christ is located between the Garden Tomb and Golgotha near by. We believe that the tomb of Christ is in the Church of the holy Sepulcher (or Church of the resurrection). And close by was the site of the crucifixion. That is what our church (and all the other) belived from about 2000 years. The Garden tomb isn't Christs tomb. That is what protestants believe.
    + If the crucifixion site he went to wasn't the real place, what more can we say.
    Pray 4 me
  • Unknown
    Dear Kirmich,

    Thank you for reminding me by raising the extremely important fact about the correct Christ's Holy Tomb site and Church, where heavenly Light appears on a yearly basis during Resurrection Liturgy for centuries. You are right of course.

    GBU
Sign In or Register to comment.