A. They are wrong about blood's origins.

1. They believe that all human blood comes from the male parent alone

Dr. Harold Sightler:

You get your blood component from your father. That mobile unit we call the blood comes from the male genes.⁽³²⁾

 Dr. M.R. DeHaan:

It is now definitely known that the blood which flows in an unborn babe's arteries and veins is not derived from the mother but is produced within the body of the foetus. Yet it is only after the sperm has entered the ovum and a foetus begins to develop that blood appears.⁽³³⁾

The Blood Indoctrinators claim that Jesus inherited all His blood from God the Father alone, but He inherited His body from His mother. The body of Jesus made Him human, but His blood made Him divine. Christ's blood is divine because it came directly from God the Father, but His body is human, because it came from Mary. Humanity is mortal and sinful due to their inheritance of both human flesh and human blood.

Because the divinity of Christ and the depravity of man depends on the inheritance of blood, the Blood Indoctrinators are under pressure to prove that Jesus did not inherit human blood. They have chosen to use science as proof; there is no Scriptural proof showing who contributes what body parts. They do this because they mistakenly believe that science has shown that all people get all their blood from only their father. The critical error here is that blood does not come from only the father; the mother contributes at least as much to the child's blood as does the father. Doctor Sightler is only half right in the above quote; you get your blood from the male AND female genes of your parents.

There is more knowledge of the genetics of human blood than about any other human tissue.⁽³⁴⁾ Yet, there are certain basic truths about inheritence that are known about all tissues.

The human body is made up of many cells. Almost every cell contains instructions that tell the cell how to build and repair itself. These instructions are written using molecules, and are bundled in a little ball, called the nucleus. The molecules are called DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). The nuclei in every cell of the body are alike, yet the cells are different. This is because each cell only uses those instructions from the nucleus that it needs to perform its functions. A heart cell does not build all the parts of a brain cell, even though both types of cells have similar nuclei.

It takes more than one gene to build a tissue. No single gene produces the blood. Rather, the body has many genes that direct the formation of blood. The genes that produce human blood are scattered across all 23 pairs of human chromosomes. They direct certain cells to become various types of blood cells.

Before a child can be conceived, there must be sperm from the man to unite with the egg of the woman. The sperm contains only half the genes needed to build a human being. The woman's egg contains the other half. Every tissue and every genetic trait of those tissues is determined in an instant, when the sperm and the egg combine. About half the genes for blood come from the man, and about half come from the woman. Therefore, human blood comes from genes given by both the mother and the father to the child.

Blood is made of many parts (components). These parts have certain features (traits) that vary depending on the traits of the parents. All the blood components in the child are a combination of both parent's genes. Almost all the traits are a mix from both parents, although some traits come from only one parent. Those traits will be discussed later. One important group of blood components are the blood group antigens. An antigen is any substance that when introduced into a living body will cause an immune-defense reaction. This would include a wide variety of objects, most of which are not otherwise associated with the human body (e.g. oil and pollen). Not everyone reacts the same way to the antigens. This reaction is a trait.

A blood group antigen is a special type of antigen. It is a protein from the surface of red blood cells. A blood group antigen could be thought of as a construction pattern on the surface of the blood cell. There are many types of proteins, and all cells are made out of them. There are many ways to put these proteins together when building a cell from them (based on the instructions from the DNA). When the proteins from the surface of red blood cells is put into people, it may cause an antibody reaction in some of them, depending on the person's inherited blood traits.

Everybody has proteins in their blood that will cause a reaction in someone else; therefore, everyone has a blood antigen in their blood. The classification of blood types is based on the blood antigens inherent in an individual. When a person reacts to the blood of a blood transfusion, it is an example of the receiver's immune system reacting to the antigens in the donor's blood. The donor's blood does not, of course, cause such a reaction in the donor.

Everyone inherits their blood antigens from both parents. The types of proteins that make up the walls of the red blood cells are built from a combination of instructions from both parents. This proves that a child inherits his blood from both of his parents. One antigen, which most people will recognize, is the Rh factor. The following illustrates the contribution that both parents play in the inheritance of blood by showing how the Rh blood type is passed to children from both parents.

Each parent, the mother and the father, has blood that is either Rh positive or Rh negative. According to the American Association of Blood Banks (AABB), "A person inherits one Rh gene from each parent."⁽³⁵⁾ Because the child receives an Rh gene from both parents, there are three possible combinations of the parental Rh genes in the child (++, --, +-). If the father or mother contributes for the trait, the child will have Rh+ blood, either from a single (+-) or a double (++) dose. Only if both parents do not contribute for the trait can the child be Rh- (--). Whether the child is Rh+ or Rh- depends on the Rh gene contribution of both parents. It is the net effect of these contributions that determines the Rh category for that child. Thus, both parents provide a portion of the child's blood, and one proof is that both parents contribute genetic information for the child's Rh blood type.

Although the Rh inheritance was used in this example, this dual endowment is true of the more than 350 identified blood group antigens,⁽³⁶⁾ and it is true of most of other components that make up human blood. No blood actually passes from either parent. Instead, the genetic information for blood formation passes from both parents. The Rh blood group is only one of many examples of the mother contributing to the child's blood inheritance.

The following chart, derived from a chart published by the AABB⁽³⁷⁾, lists blood group locus assignments to chromosomes (i.e., it tells which chromosomes have which blood group genes). The gene at each genetic system locus is responsible for its respective antigen. The author modified the AABB chart by adding a list of traits associated with these blood groups. He also listed the parent who contributes the respective chromosomes for the male child's blood (it differs slightly for the female child). Two AABB hematological researchers then checked this chart for accuracy. 

Chromosome	Genetic System Locus	Contributing Parent	Common Traits
1	Rh, Fy, Sc, Rd	Mother and Father	Rh+ or Rh-
2	Jk	Mother and Father
4	MNSs	Mother and Father
6	Ch, Rg	Mother and Father
9	ABO	Mother and Father	Type A, B, O or AB blood
X	Xg, Xk	Mother	Xg+ or Xg-

 An even more interesting case than the Rh inheritance is that of the blood components contributed from the X-chromosome. This chromosome is one of two sex chromosomes. All of the encyclopedias and technical manuals consulted by the author unanimously agree that a male receives his only X-chromosome from his mother.⁽³⁸⁾ Therefore, a male child receives the blood group traits located on the X-chromosome from his mother alone.

The X-chromosome contributes the Xg gene, for example. Unlike the case of the Rh gene contribution, the Xg gene can only be contributed to the sons by the mother. The X-chromosome provides the only cases where both parents do not contribute to the child's blood, and it is not the father who is the contributor. Since the chromosomes are the factors that cause blood to form, we must say that if sin is passed from the male's contribution to blood, alone, then the "sin gene" (yes, the idea of a sin gene is nonsense, but the Blood Indoctrinators force us to consider this) must be on the Y-chromosome. The Y-chromosome is the only chromosome that the mother does not contribute to her child. The consequence of that would be that women would be sin-free, since they do not have a Y-chromosome.

Another example of the mother's unique donation of parental blood is seen in the gene that directs the formation of blood clotting components, which is located on the X-chromosome. If the mother does not have the gene for blood clotting on both of her X-chromosomes, she may have a son who will have a major type of hemophilia, no matter how normal the father's blood may be. There is another type of hemophilia that affects daughters, for which the genetic lack is from both parents. In either event, blood clotting is inherited through the X-chromosome, and a male child gets his only X-chromosome from his mother. In other words, if the Blood Indoctrinators are correct that normal inheritance determined the formation of the Lord's body, then Jesus' mother had to contribute to His blood. Otherwise, He would have been a hemophiliac, and, therefore, ceremonially unclean.

These facts sound the death knell to the opinion that Christ was sinless because the child only receives his blood from his father and Jesus did not have a human father. It does not mean that the conception of Christ's body was produced by normal processes. In fact, it emphasizes that the conception of Christ's body was unlike any other conception. We do not know that there was either egg or sperm involved in Christ's conception, but the end result was a fully human body. His body was an ordinary human body, but His conception was supernatural. The Blood Indoctrinators try to naturalize a supernatural process.

Perhaps some of the Blood Indoctrinators made this point in order to refute the Catholic claim that it was Mary's blood in Christ's body that redeemed the world. After all, the idea that sin is passed through an inherited material substance is fairly unique in American Christianity, so it seems unlikely that this belief would arise strictly from Christian principles.⁽³⁹⁾ It is common for the Catholics to try to prove that Mary is a co-redeemer. At least one Catholic publication claims that Christ's blood came from Mary's veins.⁽⁴⁰⁾ Dr. DeHaan even used the Blood Doctrine to attack the motive of the Immaculate Conception.⁽⁴¹⁾ Therefore, it makes more sense that the Blood Indoctrinators were reacting against Catholicism instead of trying to show the mechanism of Christ's sinless nature. Why couldn't they just say so, if that were so?

The mother contributes to her son's blood, in the same way that the father contributes to his son's blood. If sin is in blood, and sin is passed to the child because that child inherits his father's blood, then sin is also passed to the child because that child inherits his mother's blood. If the Blood Indoctrinators are right, that Jesus was virgin-born to keep Him from inheriting the sin in Joseph's veins, then Jesus would still have been a sinner, since He would have inherited the sin in Mary's veins. Jesus could not have been sinless simply because He did not have an Earthly father. It is more likely that Christ's spiritual nature did not come from His body. Perhaps we humans place too much emphasis on the body as the essence of our being. Even though Christ's conception was supernatural, this does not mean that His body was "divine" (if the idea of a divine body even has meaning in this context); after all, man's body originally formed from a supernatural act, and it was not divine, even if it was immortal.

Christ's divinity had nothing to do with His material substance; He would have been divine no matter what body He had. Furthermore, His conception was a sign, and there is no biblical mention that this sign made Him divine. Both the Catholics and the Blood Indoctrinators are wrong, and for the same reason; spiritual attributes are not carried by physical substances. Such a belief is the basis for magic, another Gnostic trait.

______________________________________