How do fundamentalist Christians explain parthenogenesis?

Question

the growth and development of an embryo or seed without fertilization by a male. Parthenogenesis occurs naturally in some species, lower plants (called agamospermy), invertebrates (e.g. water fleas, aphids), honey bees and some vertebrates (e.g. lizards, salamanders, some fish, and even turkeys).

I don't know if they do have an issue with parthenogenesis - I just want their take on the subject. Thanks.

Answer 1

I actually believe in the literal Bible, but I am also nearing the completion of my botany major. (:D Finally! Whoohoo!) Anyways, I don't see a problem with it. The only really incompatible thing that I've learned is the overall theory of evolution, and I don't mean the principles of genetics, either. (There is no reason that mutations could not have started after the fall, but this isn't the point anyways.)

But basically, I doubt that anyone (who understands parthenogenesis) has a problem with it.

Answer 2

why do you think theres a problem...

God is a wise designer

however there is a discussion by Jonathon Sarfati on the subject at
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2001/1129human_clone.asp


The researchers matured some women’s eggs in a culture dish. Each egg contains DNA, the information storage molecule for the genetic instructions of the organism, as well as the polar body, a remnant egg cell, and has cumulus cells from the ovary clinging to the its surface that help nurture its development. The scientists drilled through the egg’s protective layer, the zona pellucida, removed a plug, and then extracted the DNA and polar body through the hole. Then they injected either a cumulus cell or a fibroblast (a cell that gives rise to connective tissue) obtained from skin biopsies of donors. This injected egg is activated with chemicals and growth factors, and divides within 24 hours. The resulting daughter cells contain the genetic material only from the donor, so are clones.

These researchers also induced parthenogenesis on human eggs. This word comes from Greek words for virgin birth, but is not referring to Christ’s virginal conception but to a natural process known in animals where females produce offspring without a male to fertilize them. This has never naturally occurred in humans, because mature eggs have only half the number of chromosomes (haploid) of an embryo. But the eggs don’t become haploid until close to full maturity, so these researchers induced parthenogenesis by activating them while they still had paired chromosomes (diploid). The resulting embryo would then be a clone of the woman whose egg it was.

The aim of both techniques was to produce at least the blastocyst stage, a hollow ball with at least 64 cells. From the inner cell mass of the blastocyst, they hoped to extract stem cells which would be pluripotent, i.e. have the potential to develop into any tissue but not a whole organism, and be clones of the donor, i.e. have identical genes.

Answer 3

There are some simple species that do weirder things then that.

I think its the button beetle that can spontaneously give birth to a half sized male, have sex with it, then give birth to lots of daughters... all by herself.

Its a system set up for a species that is not very complex and so sparce it rarely ever sees any others of its own kind.

Now... how does stuff like that ruin the cause of a fundamentalist christian? You are kind of reaching now.

Answer 4

Creationists are idiots. Can't distinguish between fifth grade language and allegory, which the Hebrew scholars of years past already knew. The only reason Creationists are hooked to a literal interpretation of the KJV is because they can't open their minds to anything.

Where did Cain's wife come from in the land of Nod? What does a "day" mean? Go on, you idiots.

Answer 5

That's a really interesting scientific process! I've never actually heard of it before, but it makes a lot of sense. Wasn't this referred to in Jurassic Park? (Mingled with fiction, of course.) Even so, I wonder if this could partially be used in explanation to the idea of Mary conceiving Jesus with only the power of God.

Answer 6

This is one more example why the human being needs to explain everything and more than that touch or see. You don't see God, You can not touch God... That is why we don't believe in Jesus and that is why we will be judge in the last day. If you follow the human law you will die under the human law....
Don't Judge anybody, because you will be judge 10000 times harder than that. God is the creator and he has his reasons... Why are you here alive in this planet?

Answer 7

What the hey is a fundamentalist Christian.
Does that mean I'm second class?
Does that mean I can't go to their church?
Does that mean They are in and I am out?
Does that mean that they have it and I don't?
Does that mean, they follow Jerry baby and give him their money?
Does that mean they have the answers and I don't?
Does that mean they are elite and I am trash?
If that is what it means to be a fundamentalist, I don't want it thank you.

How about Jesus came to take away my sin, and if you choose to have Him take away yours too, come on in.
The water is fine.

Answer 8

What is there to explain. This doesn't seem like it falls in the scope of religious debates.

Answer 9

I'm not a fundamentalist, but I'm not sure I understand where the conflict lies? Can you explain why the might have an issue with it? I'm not trying to be sassy, I'm honestly curious. Thanks!

Answer 10

I don't see the issue here. How does this conflict with Creationism?