ICR: Jesus Had No Mutations

Yes. our title is strange, but so is the article we found at the website of the granddaddy of all creationist outfits — the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). They’re the fountainhead of young-earth creationist wisdom.

Their article is one that’s been recycled for the holidays. It’s by Henry Morris (1918-2006), the grand old founder of ICR. It’s titled Creation and the Virgin Birth. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us and scripture references omitted:

The incarnation of Jesus Christ is such an important doctrine of the New Testament that without it there can be no true Christianity. … But how can the one who “was God” from the beginning be the same one who “was made flesh, and dwelt among us?” … How can the infinite, eternal God become finite and temporal? Such a concept seems impossibly paradoxical, yet millions quite properly believe it to be a real and vital truth.

Most of this rather long article is old Henry’s theological answers to those questions. Theology isn’t our topic, so we’re going to skip all of that. Instead, we’ll deal with more-or-less biological issues like this:

The paradox is partially resolved, of course, when it is realized that Jesus Christ came in a body which was not of sinful flesh. His body was truly “in the flesh,” but only “in the likeness of sinful flesh”

But even this doesn’t resolve the dilemma completely, for how could His body be of flesh (carbon, hydrogen, amino acids, proteins, etc.), received by the normal process of reproduction of the flesh of his parents, without also receiving their genetic inheritance, which is exactly what makes it sinful flesh?

Assuming that sin is part of our genetic inheritance, the question is a fair one. Let’s read on:

Not only is there the problem of inherent sin, but also of inherent physical defects. Over many generations, the human population has experienced great numbers of genetic mutations, and these defective physical factors have been incorporated into the common genetic pool, affecting in some degree every infant ever born. Yet the Lamb of God, to be an acceptable sacrifice for the sins of the world, must be “without blemish and without spot.”

Now we’re talking about biology. The article continues:

The solution could only be through a mighty miracle! He could not be conceived in the same manner as other men, for this would inevitably give him both a sin-nature and a physically defective body, and each would disqualify Him as a fit Redeemer. And yet He must truly become human.

Truly, this is an issue for creation science. Here’s more:

It is not surprising, therefore, that the Christian doctrine of the Virgin Birth of Christ has always been such a watershed between true Christians and either non-Christians or pseudoChristians. … On second thought, however, one realizes that it was not the virgin birth which was significant, except as a testimony of the necessity of the real miracle, the supernatural conception. The birth of Christ was natural and normal in every way, including the full period of human gestation in the womb of Mary. In all points, He was made like His brethren, experiencing every aspect of human life from conception through birth and growth to death. He was true man in every detail, except for sin and its physical effects.

Quite a problem! Moving along:

The miracle was not His birth, but His conception. And here we still face a mystery. … “Each individual gets exactly half of his chromosomes and half of his genes from his mother and half from his father. Because of the nature of gene interaction, the offspring may resemble one parent more than the other, but the two parents make equal contributions to its inheritance.” [Footnote to a biology text, for those readers who need authority for that.]


If genetic inheritance in any degree is received from either parent, there seems to be no natural way by which the transmission of the sin-nature, as well as physical defects, could have been prevented.

How does the mystery get resolved? Here it comes:

Therefore, even though He was nurtured in Mary’s womb for nine months and born without her ever knowing a man, it was also necessary for all this to have been preceded by supernatural intervention, to prevent His receiving any actual genetic inheritance through her. The body growing in Mary’s womb must have been specially created in full perfection, and placed there by the Holy Spirit, in order for it to be free of inherent sin damage.

There’s your answer — no biological parents. On with the article:

He is truly “the seed of the woman,” His body formed neither of the seed of the man nor the egg of the woman, but grown from a unique Seed planted in the woman’s body by God Himself. That is, God directly formed a body for the second Adam just as He had for the first Adam. This was nothing less than a miracle of creation, capable of accomplishment only by the Creator Himself.

We’re only about halfway through the article, but the rest mostly scriptural, so we’ll leave it to you to click over to ICR so you can read it for yourself. We’ve discussed what we think is the biologically important part — no inherited mutations. Amazing, what?

Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

9 responses to “ICR: Jesus Had No Mutations

  1. He is truly “the seed of the woman,” His body formed neither of the seed of the man nor the egg of the woman, but grown from a unique Seed planted in the woman’s body by God Himself. That is, God directly formed a body for the second Adam just as He had for the first Adam. This was nothing less than a miracle of creation, capable of accomplishment only by the Creator Himself.

    Wait until these clowns hear about uniparental disomy. Then they can speculate about how Maria’s sinful alleles disappeared from Jesus’s genome. OTOH, how can someone who denies common descent and evolution decide which of two given alleles is un-mutated.

  2. Interesting how Morris acknowledges that a succession of mutations occurred over human history. This assumption is a cornerstone of evolutionary theory, of course, but Morris assumes that all mutations had a corrupting influence, and that none were adaptive. So he believes in devolution even while rejecting evolution.

    I guess that’s the conclusion a person who believes that original creation was perfect is stuck with, since any change to perfection mars it.

    The idea exemplifies the antiquarian mindset: there was once a golden age, and everything has been deteriorating ever since. Latin was perfect, and its daughters French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian are corrupt (even though people communicate perfectly well with them every day and use them for deep philosophy and elegant poetry.) The American Constitution was perfect but has been corrupted by subsequent case law and a succession of crippling amendments (even though very few of us would want to return to slavery, to suffrage confined to propertied white males, and other conditions condoned in the original document.) One begins to see why religious, linguistic, and political conservatism often go hand-in-hand.

  3. The real place that naturalistic God-denying science needs to be attacked is not evolutionary biology, but at reproductive biology. Once it is admitted that reproduction occurs by naturalistic processes, one is on the slippery slope to equating humans with animals, and there is no stopping darwinism.

  4. Curmy, hope this isn’t too far off-topic, but it is by (oblique) way something of a breaking news topic:

    Alas, Cheetah is dead!

    See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16344309 , wherein it is revealed that the 80-year-old simian star of the silver screen was, in his last moments, “soothed by Christian music.”

    It can’t be long before some cretard body like the ICR reports on Cheetah’s deathbed recantation of Darwin. When that happens, it will be time to remember and perhaps even emulate Cheetah’s other great talent: “When he didn’t like somebody or something that was going on, he would pick up some poop and throw it at them.”


  5. Great Claw says: “Alas, Cheetah is dead!”

    Not off-topic at all. Thanks for letting us know the sad news.

  6. I read that Cheetah died today.

    Some years ago I came across an article about Cheetah, whom I remember fondly from Saturday morning TV as a kid, and it turns out you could buy artwork from Cheetah for a small donation to the animal shelter where he lived.

    So I did.

  7. Some of us theists accept Jesus birth as a miracle without trying to explain it….or trying to make anyone else believe it. You can’t explain it without making stuff up which is what they are doing. Yes, I realize that in accepting it, I may also be making stuff up, but I see a difference. This kind of explanation is also a way to avoid Jesus having any physical connection, other than Womb As Incubator, with a narsty woman.

    Cheetah gone?

  8. Ellie says: “Cheetah gone?”

    Quite a shock, isn’t it?

  9. Jesus had no mutations… hmm…. don’t remember that one from Sunday Bible Class. And the evangelicals say Catholics have strange beliefs.

    Stick with science, little Johnny, at least you can arrive at real answers.