Notices


Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


hypothetical science question

   
You do not need to do DNA testing on relics.

The wine that you drink at communion is the blood. The wafers are the flesh. Therefore, all you have to do is attend any communion, induce vomiting, and sample DNA of the vomitus.

The purpose was to question the possibility of determining a historical identity, without touching on the question of any mystical property or event. If we assume such a thing as transubstantiation to provide a valid sample for comparison it becomes rather difficult to justify making any comparison at all, as we then would expect there to be roughly zero chance that the body is the one we're looking for (having ascended physically and all that jazz).
Haven't we been over this, or something very much like it, already in the past 16 pages?

Yes, although this latest version ahs an ironic twist- since any DNa actually found from vomiting a communion wafer is likely to belong to the person who has vomited it forth, the test could be said to reveal a metaphorical truth about divinity within...
aside from that aside however, yes, it is the same thing we have had on every other page of this discussion from people who don't understand the question.

The thing is that you're harping away at a question that's been answered pages ago. You can't get any more specific than the fact that it's a male from the region that died within +/- a couple decades of 0CE that the tomb claims is Jesus, or at least a man named Joshua. If that's not enough for your controversy tooth Silver then I'm sorry but you'll have to stick to writing alt history or conspiracy thrillers.

1) i'm not harping at this point
2) we did come up with some better tests than that, though they do require getting DNa from christian relics, and it would be hard pressed to be used to exclude the body as being historical, but could certainly support the claim.

The DNA from those sources are dubious at best for reasons that have been elaborated upon in this thread and for the simple fact that the trace DNA would be very degraded from the exposed storage conditions of the bones. You could at best declare that they originated from the same general population, which would make sense for some pilgrim that grabbed a random bone while in the Holy Land and declaired 'I have found the <insert bone here> of JESUS!'. It would be a little better, but without documetary evidence to back it up there is no way to get anything more conclusive. You need written accounts when you're looking more than a few decades back. And the only written accounts of that particular body that survive all say that it came back to life and ascended bodily to heaven. Not very useful no matter how you slice it. DNA testing, especially across such a depth of time, is not the magic bullet that some would believe.

Can we now move on to next weeks choice of topic to slam on the Christian belief structure now? I'm not even religious and I'm getting tired of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savayan View Post
Can we now move on to next weeks choice of topic
Next week I suggest testing the DNA of the sun and moon and compare it to Coatlicue's DNA to see if she really did give birth to the sun, moon, and stars. I suppose we should also have to test the DNA of the stars also but I think that would be ridiculous and silly so I'll settle for merely the sun and moon...

Yes, the sources are dubious at best, which is why the lack of a match would not be signifigant, but an actual match would be (in essence confirming the relic as well as the body), which again is a large part of why it is highly unlikely the Catholic church would allow anyone to take those relics for forensic testing...

You missed my point Silver. You won't get a definitive match from such old bones. You'll be able to make the same general statements about them both coming from the same general population. And what population do you think that Christian pilgrims to the holy land would get their relics from? I'm sorry, but there is no smoking gun here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsentWizard View Post
You do not need to do DNA testing on relics.

The wine that you drink at communion is the blood. The wafers are the flesh. Therefore, all you have to do is attend any communion, induce vomiting, and sample DNA of the vomitus.
This is not a completely useless contribution, since it does provide an alternative hypothesis which is easy to test.
It could in fact partially be tested right now, by conducting the test with different persons. If the DNA matches between persons, you have found a very good candidate for Jesus' DNA.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Myth-Weavers Status       Advertise with us