the Humanity of Jesus

[libby]

With Good Friday coming up, I have been mulling over the death of Jesus Christ.
I am wondering how other Christians (non-Catholics) think of His Humanity. For me, as a Catholic, the Humanity of Jesus means that He was "born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried". Well, His suffering and death is what saved us, correct? His obedience unto death, as it were.
Again, as a Catholic, I have had to study and understand the teachings of my church (I wasn't indoctrinated as some might like to suggest). If Jesus was fully human, then it means He received His Humanity from His Mother, yes?? If God the Father interrupted that process of receiving human nature from Mary by becoming sinless Flesh in Christ, then Christ would not be fully human, IMHO, and one could challenge the fullness of His Humanity (Docetism and Gnosticism). Mary would merely have been a petri dish of some sort.
If, however, Jesus actually received His Humanity from Mary, He must have received her original sin. We all have that stain passed down from our first parents. I think all Christians believe this same doctrine.
OR, as the Catholic Church teaches, Mary was spared, by a singular grace from God, the stain of original sin. She was spared because she was the one God chose to bear His Son. Full humanity and sinlessness could not be simultaneously accomplished without sparing Mary the stain of the original sin.
Jesus' Sacrifice, which was the Sacrifice of His Human Life, not His Divine Life, was His Flesh and Blood, which He received from the Blessed Virgin Mary.
I know many consider this an extra-Biblical teaching, or perhaps even a heretical position. Does this make any sense to those folks, and if not, how is Christ's Humanity explained?

 

[mtordie]

His humanity was produced neither by natural generation (as is ours), nor by special creation, as was Adam’s. The humanity of Christ was, under the immediate agency of the Holy Spirit, supernaturally "conceived" (Isa. 7:14) of the virgin. It was "prepared" of God (Heb. 10:5); yet "made of a woman" (Gal. 4:4.).

Logically Christianity is trying to make us beleive that some cosmic Jewish zombie can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib woman was convinced from a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

So to answer your question, no, none of this makes sense. And niether does trying to figure out the humanity of someone that was placed in the womb of a virgin by a deity that doesnt have a father or a mother.

“The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”

 

[ItalianScallion]

I am wondering how other Christians (non-Catholics) think of His Humanity. For me, as a Catholic, the Humanity of Jesus means that He was "born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried". Well, His suffering and death is what saved us, correct? His obedience unto death, as it were.
Again, as a Catholic, I have had to study and understand the teachings of my church (I wasn't indoctrinated as some might like to suggest). If Jesus was fully human, then it means He received His Humanity from His Mother, yes?? If God the Father interrupted that process of receiving human nature from Mary by becoming sinless Flesh in Christ, then Christ would not be fully human, IMHO, and one could challenge the fullness of His Humanity (Docetism and Gnosticism). Mary would merely have been a petri dish of some sort.
If, however, Jesus actually received His Humanity from Mary, He must have received her original sin. We all have that stain passed down from our first parents. I think all Christians believe this same doctrine.
OR, as the Catholic Church teaches, Mary was spared, by a singular grace from God, the stain of original sin. She was spared because she was the one God chose to bear His Son. Full humanity and sinlessness could not be simultaneously accomplished without sparing Mary the stain of the original sin.
Jesus' Sacrifice, which was the Sacrifice of His Human Life, not His Divine Life, was His Flesh and Blood, which He received from the Blessed Virgin Mary.
I know many consider this an extra-Biblical teaching, or perhaps even a heretical position. Does this make any sense to those folks, and if not, how is Christ's Humanity explained?

Hi Libby. I'll give an answer here if you'd like. I'll try to address them individually since you asked a few questions.
Nothing in the Bible says exactly what happened. Some things but not everything. The Bible also teaches us not to go beyond what is written (1 Corinthians 4 v 6) so we shouldn't assume or make assertions that are not written. It's ok to be curious but we can't set any doctrine about it. The Holy Spirit caused Mary to conceive without any physical sexual act between God and her. The angel said: "what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 1 v 20) and "the Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the most high will overshadow you" (Luke 1 v 35). This is all we have to go on from the Bible.
Actually, His shed blood forgave our sins and His resurrection proved His power over death. Our personal acknowledgement & acceptance of these truths are what saves us.
Jesus was fully human but also fully God. Paul makes that clear in Philippians 2 and Colossians 1. (Other places too).
Finally, there is one misconception in one of your statements. There is no such thing as original sin and the Bible never says that Jesus was baptized as a child to remove it. We are not born with original sin but with a sin nature. That means, if we live long enough to be accountable for right & wrong, we WILL sin. (Deuteronomy 1 v 39 & Isaiah 7 v 15). If we die as unaccountable children, we will go to Heaven. Many do not agree with that but such is life. Mary was not sinless and nothing in the Bible says she was but Jesus did NOT inherit any sin from her human line. (Ezekiel 18 speaks about how each of us are accountable for our OWN sins). Jesus was sinless (John 8 v 46) (2 Corinthians 5 v 21) (Hebrews 4 v 15) (1 Peter 2 v 22) (1 John 3 v 5). Jesus "put aside" His deity but remained sinless because He was fully under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Hope it helps

 

[libby]

His humanity was produced neither by natural generation (as is ours), nor by special creation, as was Adam’s. The humanity of Christ was, under the immediate agency of the Holy Spirit, supernaturally "conceived" (Isa. 7:14) of the virgin. It was "prepared" of God (Heb. 10:5); yet "made of a woman" (Gal. 4:4.).

Logically Christianity is trying to make us beleive that some cosmic Jewish zombie can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib woman was convinced from a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

So to answer your question, no, none of this makes sense. And niether does trying to figure out the humanity of someone that was placed in the womb of a virgin by a deity that doesnt have a father or a mother.

“The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”

Hmmm....at the first you seem to be convinced of Jesus, but then you shift gears.
I'm interested in what other Christians have to say, but I don't want to debate Christianity with atheists.
Is your position that Christ is imaginary?

 

[mtordie]

Hmmm....at the first you seem to be convinced of Jesus, but then you shift gears.
I'm interested in what other Christians have to say, but I don't want to debate Christianity with atheists.
Is your position that Christ is imaginary?

Christ could have been alive 2000 years ago and preached the gospel of a god of some sort. But since he has been dead for some 2000 years he is nothing more then imaginary now.

 

[PsyOps]

His humanity was produced neither by natural generation (as is ours), nor by special creation, as was Adam’s. The humanity of Christ was, under the immediate agency of the Holy Spirit, supernaturally "conceived" (Isa. 7:14) of the virgin. It was "prepared" of God (Heb. 10:5); yet "made of a woman" (Gal. 4:4.).

Logically Christianity is trying to make us beleive that some cosmic Jewish zombie can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib woman was convinced from a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

So to answer your question, no, none of this makes sense. And niether does trying to figure out the humanity of someone that was placed in the womb of a virgin by a deity that doesnt have a father or a mother.

“The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”

Whether you believe in God or not our existence makes no sense. But, we are here. I’ve always felt more comfortable explaining our existence from the standpoint of purpose (creation) rather than resulting from a cosmic random hodgepodge of primordial events.

 

[PsyOps]

With Good Friday coming up, I have been mulling over the death of Jesus Christ.
I am wondering how other Christians (non-Catholics) think of His Humanity. For me, as a Catholic, the Humanity of Jesus means that He was "born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried". Well, His suffering and death is what saved us, correct? His obedience unto death, as it were.
Again, as a Catholic, I have had to study and understand the teachings of my church (I wasn't indoctrinated as some might like to suggest). If Jesus was fully human, then it means He received His Humanity from His Mother, yes?? If God the Father interrupted that process of receiving human nature from Mary by becoming sinless Flesh in Christ, then Christ would not be fully human, IMHO, and one could challenge the fullness of His Humanity (Docetism and Gnosticism). Mary would merely have been a petri dish of some sort.
If, however, Jesus actually received His Humanity from Mary, He must have received her original sin. We all have that stain passed down from our first parents. I think all Christians believe this same doctrine.
OR, as the Catholic Church teaches, Mary was spared, by a singular grace from God, the stain of original sin. She was spared because she was the one God chose to bear His Son. Full humanity and sinlessness could not be simultaneously accomplished without sparing Mary the stain of the original sin.
Jesus' Sacrifice, which was the Sacrifice of His Human Life, not His Divine Life, was His Flesh and Blood, which He received from the Blessed Virgin Mary.
I know many consider this an extra-Biblical teaching, or perhaps even a heretical position. Does this make any sense to those folks, and if not, how is Christ's Humanity explained?

I would simply explain this as Jesus was not the son of Mary, He was the Son of God. His humanity if from God. His death and suffering were part of the will of God representing the final sacrifice made for salvation. Just as John the Baptist said "Produce good fruits as evidence of your repentance; and do not begin to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I tell you, God can raise up children to Abraham from these stones." Regardless of how Jesus was born, God can and did make him pure. With God, everything is possible.

 

[libby]

So IT and PsyOps,
Neither of you believe that Jesus' Humanity was from His mother?? That really is a new one for me to hear, and exactly why I started this thread. The doctrine of the CC is perfectly sound if one accepts that Mary was truly His mother, but sadly, I guess I see why some of you so vehemently deny her sinlessness.
I'll have to look up chapter and verse, but the Bible does say that the Savior would be from the "seed" of a woman. It also says that Christ is a son of David by the flesh.
IT, if none of us have any original or actual sin on us at conception/birth, why do we endure the suffering imposed by the fall? Even sinless children suffer, so it seems to me that consistency would demand that suffering not begin until actual sin is committed, wouldn't it?
Again, in my research into my faith I have come to understand the Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, that is, that Mary was spared in anticipation of her role as Christ's mother. If she was spared, then He could get His humanity from her without challenge to His full Humanity. If not, His Humanity could be challenged.
Gotta go to the kiddos...looking forward to more.

 

[mtordie]

Whether you believe in God or not our existence makes no sense. But, we are here. I’ve always felt more comfortable explaining our existence from the standpoint of purpose (creation) rather than resulting from a cosmic random hodgepodge of primordial events.

Existence makes more sense through science then the belief that something that can't be seen, touched, or heard one day said poof and everything that was suppose to be here was placed. Yet since that day he or she hasn't created anything else outside of Jesus or any of the other religious icons born after the poof session.

The dinosaurs don't make sense. But I don't hear any stories about them being created. Did a t-rex sin one day and piss god off and as retribution he sent in a big comet to blow up the earth and make them all extinct? Were are there creation stories.

There isn't a single thing about creation that makes sense unless you believe in magic, fairy tales and have fear for the unknown.

 

[PsyOps]

Existence makes more sense through science then the belief that something that can't be seen, touched, or heard one day said poof and everything that was suppose to be here was placed. Yet since that day he or she hasn't created anything else outside of Jesus or any of the other religious icons born after the poof session.

The dinosaurs don't make sense. But I don't hear any stories about them being created. Did a t-rex sin one day and piss god off and as retribution he sent in a big comet to blow up the earth and make them all extinct? Were are there creation stories.

There isn't a single thing about creation that makes sense unless you believe in magic, fairy tales and have fear for the unknown.

Science can't explain how our universe "poof!" got here. It can't explain how the human egg cell - a single cell - has the intelligence to know, through merely splitting in half over and over again, where to place all the body organs and parts in their proper place to be a fully, self-sustaining, thinking, feeling organism. Science only touches the surface of our existence. It sufficiently explains many things that I accept. But it will always leave the one huge hole of our existence: how did it all get here?

 

[tommyjones]

Science can't explain how our universe "poof!" got here. It can't explain how the human egg cell - a single cell - has the intelligence to know, through merely splitting in half over and over again, where to place all the body organs and parts in their proper place to be a fully, self-sustaining, thinking, feeling organism. Science only touches the surface of our existence. It sufficiently explains many things that I accept. But it will always leave the one huge hole of our existence: how did it all get here?

religion has the same hole though. Where was god when he made the universe and where did he get the stuff and the space?

 

[PsyOps]

So IT and PsyOps,
Neither of you believe that Jesus' Humanity was from His mother?? That really is a new one for me to hear, and exactly why I started this thread. The doctrine of the CC is perfectly sound if one accepts that Mary was truly His mother, but sadly, I guess I see why some of you so vehemently deny her sinlessness.
I'll have to look up chapter and verse, but the Bible does say that the Savior would be from the "seed" of a woman. It also says that Christ is a son of David by the flesh.
IT, if none of us have any original or actual sin on us at conception/birth, why do we endure the suffering imposed by the fall? Even sinless children suffer, so it seems to me that consistency would demand that suffering not begin until actual sin is committed, wouldn't it?
Again, in my research into my faith I have come to understand the Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, that is, that Mary was spared in anticipation of her role as Christ's mother. If she was spared, then He could get His humanity from her without challenge to His full Humanity. If not, His Humanity could be challenged.
Gotta go to the kiddos...looking forward to more.

Didn’t God create Mary? What was the catalyst of her humanity? Can the Son of God’s humanity rest on another human rather than God? I am not in the habit of criticizing other denominations of The Church because they all serve as part of the body of Christ; but I feel like the CC puts too much emphasis on Mary. I certainly don’t want to ruffle feathers with this; it’s just my personal thought. This feeling does nothing to detract from the importance of the CC.

I accept that Mary was his mother by birth but if you consider this passage:

While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to Him. Someone told Him “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.” He replied, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven s my brother, sister and mother...Matthew 12:46-50”

Jesus also charged us to honor our parents. But Jesus recognized that honoring our parents can’t have a proper context without putting God first.

 

[PsyOps]

religion has the same hole though. Where was god when he made the universe and where did he get the stuff and the space?

This tries to put a physical limitation on God. First of all God is eternal. He always was; an incomprehensible thought for humans. This also puts a human limitation on God’s abilities and will. If you are asking me to explain how God wills things into existence…well… I will explain that when you (or science) can explain what came before the big bang, and how all that stuff got out there in the universe. Both impossible to explain. It boils down to faith in one or the other.

I argue the existence of things from a standpoint of intelligence. Again, go back to my egg cell analogy… how does a single egg cell know how to divide over and over eventually placing ever body part in their proper place resulting in a single, self-sustaining being? There must be an intelligent process involved. What is this intelligence? I refuse to accept that it just happens at random. Randomness cannot have the same results billions of times over and over.

 

[tommyjones]

I argue the existence of things from a standpoint of intelligence. Again, go back to my egg cell analogy… how does a single egg cell know how to divide over and over eventually placing ever body part in their proper place resulting in a single, self-sustaining being? There must be an intelligent process involved. What is this intelligence? I refuse to accept that it just happens at random. Randomness cannot have the same results billions of times over and over.

I dont know, but that doen't mean that the flying spaghetti monster did it either......

just becasue there are things we can't explain doesn't mean we should throw out all logic and put total faith in a 'story' about a supernatural being who walked on water, turn water into wine and rose from the dead, among other things.

While i do agree that science doesn't expalin everthing, and that there most likely is some sort or higher being, i do not believe that the christian faith or any other religion i had read accurately describes this entity (as we all agree, the afterlife is incomprehendable to humans, at least while we are alive)

 

[PsyOps]

I dont know, but that doen't mean that the flying spaghetti monster did it either......

Well, I don’t see billions of people flocking to the “flying spaghetti monster” in worship.

just becasue there are things we can't explain doesn't mean we should throw out all logic and put total faith in a 'story' about a supernatural being who walked on water, turn water into wine and rose from the dead, among other things.

I find this the stupidity of the debate, from both sides. I believe there is a vital mix of believing and understand how both science and religion explains our existence. Throwing either away for the other isn’t rational. But, in explaining things like our existence doesn’t have a logical explanation no matter how you sum it up. How or why did a universe just pop up and through a spinning of chemical responses result in life on this earth? How or why would a God decide to make such a creation. Neither question truly has a rational or logical explanation. You simply chose to have faith in one or the other; or a combination of both.

While i do agree that science doesn't expalin everthing, and that there most likely is some sort or higher being, i do not believe that the christian faith or any other religion i had read accurately describes this entity (as we all agree, the afterlife is incomprehendable to humans, at least while we are alive)

I don’t think it can be accurately described. Or perhaps it has and we just don’t accept the answer. We are always looking for more. We are always asking more questions with more information we are given. I appreciate the insatiable appetite humans have for more knowledge, but there comes point where I just have to resolve to accepting the answer I have been given. Does this answer everything for me? Of course not. My belief will result in knowing the answer when God is done.

 

[libby]

Didn’t God create Mary? What was the catalyst of her humanity? Can the Son of God’s humanity rest on another human rather than God? I am not in the habit of criticizing other denominations of The Church because they all serve as part of the body of Christ; but I feel like the CC puts too much emphasis on Mary. I certainly don’t want to ruffle feathers with this; it’s just my personal thought. This feeling does nothing to detract from the importance of the CC.

I accept that Mary was his mother by birth but if you consider this passage:



Jesus also charged us to honor our parents. But Jesus recognized that honoring our parents can’t have a proper context without putting God first.

I can't tell you how much I appreciate the way you are discussing this. You disagree, but you are very respectful of another take on the subject. There are too many people who condemn what others honestly believe to be Truth, calling it indoctrination or some other such nonesense.
I'll be back after noon to respond to specifice points.
Thanks again,
Libby

 

[PsyOps]

I can't tell you how much I appreciate the way you are discussing this. You disagree, but you are very respectful of another take on the subject. There are too many people who condemn what others honestly believe to be Truth, calling it indoctrination or some other such nonesense.
I'll be back after noon to respond to specifice points.
Thanks again,
Libby

Thank you. And I apologize for getting off topic, but it's important to me to hear and respond to folks that question the validity of God. Some folks (like tommyjones) have good and valid questions and responses for answering to our existence... others (like JPC) serve a more sinister purpose.

 

[libby]

Didn’t God create Mary? What was the catalyst of her humanity? Can the Son of God’s humanity rest on another human rather than God? I am not in the habit of criticizing other denominations of The Church because they all serve as part of the body of Christ; but I feel like the CC puts too much emphasis on Mary. I certainly don’t want to ruffle feathers with this; it’s just my personal thought. This feeling does nothing to detract from the importance of the CC.

I accept that Mary was his mother by birth but if you consider this passage:



Jesus also charged us to honor our parents. But Jesus recognized that honoring our parents can’t have a proper context without putting God first.

Hi again,
Well, I guess that the ideas that the humanity of Jesus "relies" on Mary is the first clarification I can make. He only relied on her insofar as God put into place that each of us is a product of our mother and our father. I do not believe any of us pro-create without the intervention of God; all life comes from Him.
Many people think the CC puts too much emphasis on Mary, and I can see why folks think that if they don't understand why the church teaches what she does. That is why, as I said in my first post, I did do the research as an adult, about the doctrines of Catholicism. Who/what Mary is and was is entirely dependent on Christ, it's not the other way around. For early century heretics who may have argued His oneness with the Father, it had to made clear that Jesus was God, hence the title for Mary, theotokos.
The passage from Scripture you cited is not in any way contradictory to what I believe to be truth. I don't think Jesus was bringing Mary's position down, I think He was trying to elevate the rest of us. She was, indeed, His mother, and nobody argues that. So, it follows based on this passage that she does the will of the Father. Perhaps she was chosen to be the literal, biological mother of Jesus because she was perfectly united to the will of the Father.:shrug:
Jesus fulfilled all of the commandments perfectly, so I would imagine that honoring His mother would include doing all that was within His power to spare her from that which would destroy her, that being sin. Again, aside from the biological concerns I said at the first, His sparing her from original sin would be a thoroughly appropriate way of a Son to honor His mother.

 

[libby]

There is no such thing as original sin

IT said in an earlier post that there is no such thing as original sin.
Adam by his fault transmitted to us not only death but also sin, "for as by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners" (Romans 5:19). In verse 12, which corresponds to verse 19, we see that by one man two things have been brought on all men, sin and death, the one being the consequence of the other and therefore not identical with it. The Apostle did not affirm that all men are mortal on account of their actual sins; since children who die before coming to the use of reason have never committed such sins; but he expressly affirms the contrary in the fourteenth verse: "But death reigned", not only over those who commited actual sin as Adam did, but "even over them also who have not sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam."
If original sin does not exist, what is the theological reason why we have such a desire to do our own will instead of God's?

 

[mtordie]

Science can't explain how our universe "poof!" got here. It can't explain how the human egg cell - a single cell - has the intelligence to know, through merely splitting in half over and over again, where to place all the body organs and parts in their proper place to be a fully, self-sustaining, thinking, feeling organism. Science only touches the surface of our existence. It sufficiently explains many things that I accept. But it will always leave the one huge hole of our existence: how did it all get here?

And were does creation dictate how this is done?