The Instigator
Pro (for)
2 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
13 Points

It's time to use DNA taken from the Turin Shroud to clone Jesus Christ

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/16/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,445 times Debate No: 35534
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (21)
Votes (3)




You'd think after over two thousand years of slacking, dossing about and generally doing nothing much Jesus Christ would rattle his dags and come back down to Earth to assert his father's dominance over the heathens, wouldn't you? But no, he obviously can't be bothered.

Fine, if Jesus won't come of his own accord, we should force him to pay us a visit. That's right, we humans have come a long way since he was last here and we now have the technology to clone humans from DNA, and we've got his on the Turin Shroud. [1,2]

What's more, these days we've got 'planes so there'll be no excuse for him to hang about in the same place like last time; this time we should make him convert the Hindus in India, the Buddhists in China and the savages in Africa; just to prove he's not a racist who only wants white people to find salvation.

A visit from Jesus is long overdue and that's why I affirm that it's time to use DNA taken from the Turin Shroud to clone him and bring him back to Earth, whether he likes it or not.

Thank you.



Good to have another debate with you brian, you always have such interesting resolutions.

I have simply 2 contentions.

1) The Shroud of Torin does not have Jesus's DNA: it's been speculated it was most likely created by Leanardo Da Vinci. Though the artiest of the Shroud can not be proven, that it never covered the body of Jesus can, simply because the blood stains are not left on the cloth in such way that it show's signs they came from a bloody head the cloth was wrapped around. Instead they show all the evedince of having been projected onto it from distant body shaped object.

2) Cloning would not accomplish your objective: Even if the Shroud was not a fake you would not succead in bringing back Jesus by cloning him from the DNA. you would only create a new human life that has a twin copy of Jesus's body.

if there are any comic book nerds out there reading this debate I make a refrence analagy for you that you might understand. this would be like when Robin (Time Drake) tried to make a clone of SuperBoy (Conner Kent) after he had died, and Wonder Girl (Cassandra Cain) had to explain to him that it would not matter even if Robin could succesfully Clone Conner because "he wouldnt be our Conner..."

In summery:

The real Jesus will come back when he is good and ready, and has waited for the last sinner to have there opportunity to be saved, in his own divine and perfect timing. He is the Lord of all Creation, and King of a Kingdom that is not of this earth, It's not really anyone's place to make any suggestions for what Jesus is supposed to be doing right now, he is the king not us, How we can serve him , not how he can serve us, should be what is on our minds.
Debate Round No. 1


I would like to thank Marauder for accepting this debate and to respond to his arguments as follows:

1) The Shroud of Torin [sic] does not have Jesus's [sic] DNA

A recent study has determined that the Shroud of Turin is between 1,300 and 3,000 years old and dismisses the 1988 carbon-14 dating tests which concluded that the linen sheet was a medieval fake (1). Of course, that doesn't conclusively prove that the DNA is that of Jesus Christ, only cloning him from that DNA will prove that.

2) Cloning would not accomplish your objective

It is possible that we might just get a biological replica of Christ with his intellect and personality reproduced faithfully but without the ability to perform amazing tricks, we won't know until we have cloned him and put him through a series of tests:

Shamefully, there are around 5,000 people sleeping rough of the streets of London and the evil Tory politicians in Westminster want to ban charities from giving them food (2). I'm sure Jesus would want to take a stance against this callous proposal so we should gather all the homeless people together in Hyde Park, provide him with five small barley loaves and two small fish. If Jesus is the Messiah he would say: "Have the people sit down" then take the loaves, give thanks, and distribute it to those who are seated as much as they want. He would then do the same with the fish. And when they had all had enough to eat, he would say: "Gather the pieces that are left over. Let nothing be wasted." And then we would gather them and fill twelve baskets with the pieces of the five barley loaves left over by those who had eaten. If, however, Jesus is unable to feed the famished multitude and they turn on him and we have to rescue him from being lynched, we will suspect he may not really be a reconstituted prophet.

The seas around the UK are often rough and treacherous and seafarers often find themselves in peril off Britain's coast. Fortunately, the Royal Air Force has always on standby to rescue sailors in trouble. Unfortunately, though, the wicked Tory-led government has decided to privatize this vital service and, as a result, the number of bases will be reduced from 17 to 10 thus putting many lives at risk (3). I'm sure Jesus would be appalled by this policy and would help anyone drowning because no helicopters were available locally to rescue them, so we should stand him on a beach on a stormy night while we take a boat three or four miles out to sea where we would throw a man who couldn"t swim overboard. If Jesus is the Messiah he would walk across the water to the drowning man and say: "Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid." But, of course, the man would be afraid; and beginning to sink, he would cry; "Lord, save me." And immediately Jesus would stretch forth his hand, and catch him, and say unto him: "O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?" If, however If, Jesus is unable to rescue the drowning man and just stands on the beach watching helplessly, we will suspect he may not really be a recreated deity.

Britain's health service has always been free at the point of use but the heartless Tories think that health care should be available according to ability to pay rather than need and are closing public hospitals on a wholesale basis to boost demand for private health care providers (4). I'm sure Jesus would be appalled to see poor people who are unable to pay for private treatment suffer as a result of the Tory cutbacks and would step into help, so we should present him with a beggar who had been blinded by a passing investment banker who had kicked his head in for the audacity of asking him for some change. On seeing the beggar, if Jesus is the Messiah, he would spit on the ground, make some mud with the saliva, and put it on the man's eyes. Then he would say: "Go, wash in the bathroom then go home seeing". His neighbours and those who had formerly seen him begging would ask: "Isn't this the same man who used to sit and beg, is he not blind?" Then, to discover the truth they would hurl a rock at his head and if the beggar ducks then we will know Jesus is the real deal, but if the rock hits the beggar's head knocks him unconscious then we would have to accept that Jesus probably isn't a divine messenger after all.

Whatever the results of the above tests, they have got to be worth trying, haven't they?

In summary, my opponent describes Jesus as a "king". So he may be but Kings must be able to command respect from their subjects. Almost all European countries were once ruled by hereditary monarchs but, over the years, numerous kings and queens have lost the respect of the people and been deposed in revolutions and, similarly, Jesus' reign on Earth is in serious jeopardy.

You see, when Jesus was last on Earth slam hadn't even been invented but, worldwide, there are now almost as many Muslims as Christians and, furthermore, Islam is growing much faster than Christianity (5). With access to the Internet these days people in search of spiritual enlightenment realise they have a large number of gods to choose from and Jesus" failure to come back to Earth to earn the respect of humanity is costing Christianity widespread popular support and this may eventually lead to his downfall.

Thank you.



Shroud of Turin is a fake:

You misunderstand the nature of the evidence that proves the shroud of Turin is a fake if you think it matters how old it is proven to be. The age is not question, it is the nature of how the blood stains could form in the shape that they have on the cloth. You cannot reproduce those blood stains on a duplicate piece of cloth by any means of wrapping cloth around a bloody skull. The stains lack the signs of having come from a spherical surface. The shroud has only been reproduced in a lab by hanging a separate fake body from a ceiling, and then essentially using photograph tech to imprint the image of the body onto the cloth. Whether Leonardo used an Old Piece of Cloth he found in his day to do this or someone in Jesus’s day used a new piece of Cloth to make this fake shroud, there can be no question it was never wrapped around a bloody body, and thus it is not the bandages that covered Jesus.

Cloning Jesus would not accomplish the objective:

After my opponent typed a paragraph of his fantasy of what Jesus would do if he were here now that was completely irrelevant to my actual rebuttal to his proposal he managed to slide only one unsupported arguments that deal with my issue with cloning Jesus.

1) “It’s possible we could successfully clone Jesus with is personality and intelligence intact”

My opponent had 5 source links. Not one of them was attached to this statement. Out of all the sentences in my opponents final round that should have been given a source to back the statement up this was the only one my opponent needed to do that for and he did not. That should be reflected when you cast your vote on sources. This is kind of a key point the whole debate hinges on.

And It’s flat out not possible to simply reproduce Jesus by cloning him. Common sense should tell you that. A Clone would be raised in a lab, surrounded by people in lab coats, or fostered by parents in our modern culture, corrupted by media lie’s and who known’s what else possibly, he may even get Peter Pan Syndrome if he gets a hold of Video Games to pass the time with. The one and only Original Jesus Grew up in a different timer period, culture, and set of life circumstances. Different one of a kind parents, one of a kind Ruling Empire. You can’t clone experiences, and because of that I would dare say you can’t really clone intelligence or personality. Personality is shaped by experience, and intelligence is absent without education. So who teaches this Clone Jesus to say the things you want Clone Jesus to say? You? Billy Graham? The Pope? Whatever child you grow out of a tube, there is no amount of Padlove Dog conditioning that will make him the same as the historic Jesus, and no amount of conditioning that will not simply make him a replica in thought and personality to some already existing living person who approved of all you decided to condition the boy with.

Final Summary:

My two rebuttal’s have not been negated, as none of my opponents arguments address the nature of either contention adequately.

Say whatever you will about my King, people have been saying similar crap for 1,000’s of years against Jesus and it’s never made a difference, his Kingdom still stand’s in the form of his church to this day, it’s not going anywhere even if you try to bully in it and stamp it out. The day this trend actually takes a real serious turn to where it truly is more than just an exaggeration that Christianity is being wiped out in favor of some other faith like Islam, then the Real Deal King of Kings really will be coming back because it will be then that he had been “long suffering” long enough as the last potential believer will have already been saved and you will get your wish. Some Amazing things are going to happen that day and I for one look forward to it, whenever that day is, regardless of how long it took to get there.

I thank my opponent for this debate.

Debate Round No. 2
21 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ItsOnlyMe 3 years ago
Wow! But how do we prove it?? Do we ask the baby to walk on water?? And who is going to raise the Kid?? Would his foster parents then become saints (well, at least the mother)? Do we just throw away soiled diapers? What about school? Would we place him in an inner-city public school or send him to some posh, snooty, private one? What if he doesn't look European enough?? Do we allow video games? Would we buy him shoes made in China?

Has all this cloning stuff been thougt through??

What if the baby turns out to be a girl??
Posted by RoyLatham 3 years ago
In the US, people feeding the homeless is strictly prohibited. Food for distribution must be prepared in government-approved kitchen. That's too expensive for most people. Far better than people not eat than to let them eat without proper government supervision.

From the arguments presented, I understand collecting money for charity is not prohibited, only the "soup run" mechanism. According to Brian, there are lots of Brits who say, "Donate for charity? What, you mean with no one running? Never, I have to see arms and legs in motion --and more than just one or two-- before I contribute." Seems unlikely. The left cares way more about making a public show of how loving and caring they are than they do about helping poor people.

Bill Clinton proved the method for ending homelessness. Elect a leftist government and the next day the leftist-dominated press stops reporting the problem. The problem then disappears. It worked here; it will work In Britain.
Posted by Korashk 3 years ago
I was going to post a comment about how cloning works, but after noticing the instigator I don't feel the need anymore.
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
A little conflicted on my vote, given how far con's conclusion wondered off point. I'll have to ponder this, and reread the whole thing when it's not so late at night.
Posted by ItsOnlyMe 3 years ago
The blood chromosome thing could be explained by the lack of chia seeds or hemp hearts available in Nazareth at the time. My guess is the nasty Romans did not allow such imports. However, there were lots of loaves and fishes available (and organic at that) so fish oil and omega3 would not be a problem.

It would also be interesting to know exactly which blood type Jesus had. If they could figure out the chromosome thing surely they could figure out the type. (Good thing Jesus never needed a blood transfusion! )

Of course all this also presents unsettling Second Coming issues in that if Jesus ever needed a few bucks, he probably would not qualify as a blood doner. Bummer.... You would think with all his connections incompatible blood would be overlooked.
Posted by rhondadpattison 3 years ago
"The fascinating finding in this blood was that instead of 46 chromosomes, there were only 24. There were 22 autosomal chromosomes, one X chromosome and one Y chromosome. This evidences that the person to whom this blood belonged to had a mother but no human father, because the normal contribution of paternal chromosomes is missing.";
Posted by rhondadpattison 3 years ago
Just found this article... don't know if it's true... somethingto ponder though...

"Ron Wyatt noticed a dried, black substance in an earthquake crack in the roof, above the Ark of the Covenant. He noticed that this black substance was also on the lid of the cracked stone casing. Obviously, this substance had dripped from the crack in the roof, and provision had been made for it to land on the Ark of the Covenant, as the stone lid had been cracked and moved aside. Ron Wyatt wondered what substance could be so sacred, that God made provision for it to land on the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant. He remembered the earthquake crack at the foot of the cross hole, and suddenly an awesome realisation as to what had happened, came over him. Ron Wyatt traced the earthquake crack, and indeed it was the same crack as the one at the cross hole. The dried black substance in the crack was tested and proved to be blood, apparently the blood of Jesus Christ. The Bible says that when Jesus died there was an earthquake and the rocks were rent (Matt. 27:51). A Roman soldier speared Christ in His side in order to make sure He was dead, and blood and water poured out (John 19:34). Ron Wyatt discovered that this same blood and water poured down through the earthquake crack and fell upon the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant. "
Posted by Benshapiro 3 years ago
This topic makes me LOL. Its time to clone Jesus Christ
Posted by DebatingAccount 3 years ago
"Ever wonder where the Arc of the Covenant is? It's with God, the only place it can be trusted to be safe.
Revelations 11:19 Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and within his temple was seen the ark of his covenant. And there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake and a great hailstorm.
CE LA.... pause and think on these things!

As for the ignorant statement about God being prejudiced/biased....
Rev 7:4 Then I heard the number of those who were sealed: 144,000 from all the tribes of Israel. 5 From the tribe of Judah 12,000 were sealed, from the tribe of Reuben 12,000, from the tribe of Gad 12,000, 6 from the tribe of Asher 12,000, from the tribe of Naphtali 12,000, from the tribe of Manasseh 12,000, 7 from the tribe of Simeon 12,000, from the tribe of Levi 12,000, from the tribe of Issachar 12,000, 8 from the tribe of Zebulun 12,000, from the tribe of Joseph 12,000, from the tribe of Benjamin 12,000.
9 After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.//
Yea... real Nazi there! :/

Now to the TOPIC... I don't believe any DNA will be able to be recovered BC of the 'way' Jesus dissolved into thin air (for lack of a better description)...
If you watched the video about the Shroud of Turin... he had to have miraculously vaporized THROUGH the Shroud... for the impression to have been left so perfectly. That being said... "what ever" happened to make Jesus disappear, I think, would have messed with the DNA purity on the cloth. In other words, it has been 'tampered with', by God's Holy intervention!"

You cant disprove an arguement about god with evidence from the Bible. The bible is a collection of rules and stories from people who either claim to hear directly from god, or from people who claim to hear from these
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
A clone of Leanardo Da Vinci, named "Jesus Christ Jr." would still be awesome.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Logan94 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: This a terrible idea, and is very stupid.
Vote Placed by InquireTruth 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: CON had numerous spelling errors and sloppy sentences. CON took an eggleston debate and infused no humor at all in his responses, a true shame and waste of these classics. Of course, he won the argument, but at what cost?
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: A poor debate, and, doubly unfortunate for Pro, neither funny nor cleverly sarcastic. Pro should have cited the Biblical passage where Jesus said that government should assume authoritarian control, tax the whiz out of people, and redistribute the wealth. Lacking that, Pro needed to rebut Con's arguments about the authenticity of the shroud. He did not.