Xaquin44
New Member
yeah .... which is why I say that god wasn't nor will he ever be a man such as we are. For if he was/is then he is no longer god. You can't have it both ways.
the Humanity of Jesus
- Thread starter libby
- Start date
yeah .... which is why I say that god wasn't nor will he ever be a man such as we are. For if he was/is then he is no longer god. You can't have it both ways.
Ahhh Starman, now we have come full circle to my original post. Now you and I have the benefit of 2000 years of Christianity to fall back on, but what about the early Christians? Converts from Judaism and Gentiles as well? How could all of those beautiful truths you pointed out in your most recent post be explained to the world?
We have the benefit, also, of the advancement of the science of life. Did anyone know at the time about the microscopic details of human reproduction? Uh, no. So, my original point...
Our salvation was effected by that Precious Flesh and Blood. It was without the stain of sin, as you said. From whom did Jesus Christ get His Human nature? His mother, Mary. If He did not get that Flesh from her, if it was gotten from God the Father, and she was merely that petri dish, then Jesus Christ loses that full humanity. Not because God couldn't do things that way, but because that is how He said it would be done. That is the answer to the question, no matter how one might try to maneuver their way around it.
Well, I think it's common knowledge how the gender of a baby is determined, but I don't see how that has any bearing on the topic at hand. Interesting? Maybe, mildly.
More interesting to my mind is the natural and supernatural reality of "the two shall become one", and how that pertains to this discussion. We know that a child is formed from the DNA of both parents. If we could perform such a test today, would we find Jesus' DNA matching Mary's? Yeah, I think so. The OT is full of the psalms and the like of what an ideal marriage should be, what we should all strive for in our marriages, thereby being "one" supernaturally, as well as biologically in children. Now it seems to me that in such a holy event as the Word being made Flesh in the womb of a woman would require that woman, the being that contributes the physicality to the Son of God, to be a purified vessel. Is this for her glory?? No, it points to who she bears. Okay, I'm getting off on a tangent here...BTW-Anyone reading who has their mind in the gutter, as though I am talking of sex between God and Mary, please step back and see that I said supernatural union.
ItalianScallion
Harley Rider
I had said: I COULD believe that Jesus humanity was from Mary but I didn't say the Bible said that, so I can't say it with any authority, just speculation. I'm just going by the fact that Jesus was fully human & fully God, so one could safely assume it was from Mary but it might not have been so I walk carefully on this topic.
Yes, but it still doesn't say sinless. A virgin whom God found favor with, yes but sinless, no.libby said:
There is much inferred in the Bible Libby. You have to discern what it is. Jesus never said the exact words: I am God, but it's certainly inferred in MANY passages. And let's not get into the CC's "inferrences". Some are clearly man made, not inferred. We don't need to reopen that wound.libby said:
It is not splitting hairs at all. I could say that I was born with a "work nature" meaning that when I was old enough to work, I'd get a job but it doesn't mean that I was born having a job already.libby said:
I can only say it depends on how much truth God has given that child. The age of accountability is when a child knows enough to reject wrong & choose right. It doesn't necessarily mean that the child has heard of Jesus yet. In (Deuteronomy 1 v 39, Isaiah 7 v 15 & Hebrews 10 v 26) we are accountable for how much truth God has given us when we reach that age. Also remember that NO ONE is accountable UNTIL they have reached THEIR age of accountability. That is why it is different in everyone. It is determined by what they have been exposed to and how much they can understand what they've heard (mental ability). This goes for those who will not be saved also. They have been made accountable by God and yet choose against Him.libby said:
ItalianScallion
Harley Rider
Come on Xaq! We all have 2 natures. We are both physical and spiritual whether you like it or not. When you die, your spirit will live on forever in Heaven or Hell. (hopefully the first). So Jesus was a fully physical human as we are BUT His spiritual side was STILL God. Ours is not. If someone in the Bible claimed to be God they were struck dead (Herod for one). Jesus claimed it and was not struck down. Jesus was able to forgive sins, something ONLY God can do. Yes my little Xaquin, you can have it both ways.
Oh yes He can!
PsyOps
Pixelated
I didn’t say Jesus’ humanity is pointless; to view His humanity from any other aspect than that of God is pointless (to me). You can’t fabricate His humanity around another human. All the examples you cited didn’t come from Mary, it came from God.
PsyOps
Pixelated
He was a man completely filled with the Holy Spirit. This is what separates His existence from ours. His spiritual being was completely in tune with God's will.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Why would God be a man such as we are? Just like, why would God make a stone so big He can't lift it? Regardless of whether the concept of God makes sense or not there are certain logical facts within the discussion that you can't argue.
Starman3000m
New Member
Sorry, I misunderstood your post PsyOps. Indeed I have seen where many others (not just in this discussion) attempt to impute human sinfulness into the Being of Yeshua and I agree with you that one cannot fabricate His humanity around any human who ever lived.
Xaquin44
New Member
I think you all are missing my point .... I'm not arguing spiritual nature vs. physical nature, I'm saying that if you are god .... I mean THE GOD, you can't be some normal man.
because you're god.
see?
It's not like you can just remove the power to bend creation to your will.
because you're god.
see?
It's not like you can just remove the power to bend creation to your will.
Xaquin44
New Member
whatever, my little #### smoker.
The age of accountability is not scriptual, I believed this falshood for years.
No where in the bible does it even imply it. These are the verse they use to support it and they are so week its not funny.
David in his morning over his son stated he would see him again.
<DIR>2Sa 12:23 But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me."
They use this one to
<DIR>Act 11:14 he will declare to you a message by which you will be saved, you and all your household.'
</DIR>
<?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O /><O
>We are all born sinners, The reformed faith, or some in it, believe that the salvation of the Godly parents is imputed to the child. This is wrong too!</O>(Psa 58:3-4 KJV) The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. {4} Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear;
“For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth. – Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated” Romans 9:11-13<O
> </O><O
></O> <O
>I personally think that if the child is of the elect than....<DIR>Joh 10:29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.
Were all born sinners, as enemies of God, its only by his grace and his gift of salvation that we can be saved
</DIR></O
> </DIR>
Xaquin44
New Member
b.s.
If we're born sinners, whose fault is it?
well lets see, the only thing that could possibly have access to us in a spiritual way before birth is god.
so if we're born sinners, then it's his fault, not ours.
p.s. I think it's terrible and reprehensible on many levels that you could look at an infant and think that he or she is a sinner.
good to know that you think a child who can't walk, talk or sit up is an enemy of god.
Starman3000m
New Member
libby said:
Hmmm... OK - but now the question is: If Yeshua derived His "full humanity" from His mother, Mary, are you saying that He would have inherited sinful blood from Mary's genes or are you saying that Mary was also a sinless being therefore no sin in her blood to pass along?
Re-phrased:
1.) Mary was a sinless human being who did not inherit the Adamic nature,
or;
2.) Mary inherited the Adamic nature of sin, like all humans do, and passed that sinful nature of humanity along to the Christ-Child, Yeshua,
or;
3.) As presented earlier, a woman is not the one that has the sin-seed since women do not biologically produce "seeds". In which case Yeshua's birth by the Intervention of The Holy Spirit of God (Matthew 1:18-25) would remain uniquely pure and undefiled while still being "human" and Divine at the same time.
We are told that Yeshua was without sin (Hebrews 4:15) and that to me indicates His Blood was not tainted with the sin-seed of Adam otherwise He would have inherited the weakness of the flesh which you and I and all humans on earth have in common.
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:3-4)
Last edited:
Well, you know which option I pick. That God spared Mary from original sin by a singular grace. This is why I said in my first post that I did study the doctrines of the Catholic Church when I became an adult, and I am not Catholic by indoctrination. It is absolutely consistent with everything Biblical that Mary was sinless, and that she was redeemed by her Son. I heard it put this way once. If a man falls into a pit and is pulled out by another, we could say that the former was saved by the latter. However, if a man is walking towards a pit and is not seeing it for some reason, and another man alerts him to the danger and he avoids the pit, then it is still accurate to say that the former saved the latter.
Perhaps it was because of the reasons you cited, Starman, namely, that seed comes through man, that God was sure to say "seed of a woman" in Genesis. This way we are all very clear on from whom Jesus received His Flesh and Blood. And again, it was that spotless Flesh and Blood that was shed for us.
In 1 Kings 8:19 we see that the Son of David (who at this time was Solomon, but the type/prophecy fits nicely to my way of thinking) will build a temple to honor the Lord. The Lord told David that "the son who will spring from you, he shall build the temple in my honor". Other translations say that "your son, who is your own flesh and blood" will build the temple. Jesus, of course, was the temple that would rise up in three days and He was Flesh of His mother's flesh. Is this definitive typology? No, but I don't think any typology is. Some will accuse me and the CC of seeing what we want to see, and then I would say the same to a Bible Christian.
My purpose for the thread, though, was simply to find how Jesus' full Humanity is explained if He had a "biological" mother who was stained. I love the segue into other stuff, though.
Sorry I didnt set the standards God did. It because of adam we have our sin nature. Have you ever read the doctrine of total depravity? Its mans summation of Gods word backed with scripture.
Here is a short comentary on it,
Total Depravity by John Piper
The first step in becoming a Christian, is understanding our sin nature and how God see's us.Then we can understand why we need a savior, and what we need to be saved from.
CHAPTER 6
Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof
1. Our first parents, being seduced by the subtlety and temptation of Satan, sinned, in eating the forbidden fruit. This their sin, God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsel, to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory.
2. By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body.
3. They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed; and the same death in sin, and corrupted nature, conveyed to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation.
4. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions.
5. This corruption of nature, during this life, doth remain in those that are regenerated; and although it be, through Christ, pardoned, and mortified; yet both itself, and all the motions thereof, are truly and properly sin.
6. Every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, doth, in its own nature, bring guilt upon the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and curse of the law, and so made subject to death, with all miseries spiritual, temporal, and eternal.
Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof
1. Our first parents, being seduced by the subtlety and temptation of Satan, sinned, in eating the forbidden fruit. This their sin, God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsel, to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory.
2. By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body.
3. They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed; and the same death in sin, and corrupted nature, conveyed to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation.
4. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions.
5. This corruption of nature, during this life, doth remain in those that are regenerated; and although it be, through Christ, pardoned, and mortified; yet both itself, and all the motions thereof, are truly and properly sin.
6. Every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, doth, in its own nature, bring guilt upon the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and curse of the law, and so made subject to death, with all miseries spiritual, temporal, and eternal.
Last edited:
Psalms 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in SIN did my mother conceive me.
I John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive outselves, and the truth is not in us
Last edited:
Starman3000m
New Member
Well, you know which option I pick. That God spared Mary from original sin by a singular grace. This is why I said in my first post that I did study the doctrines of the Catholic Church when I became an adult, and I am not Catholic by indoctrination. It is absolutely consistent with everything Biblical that Mary was sinless, and that she was redeemed by her Son. I heard it put this way once. If a man falls into a pit and is pulled out by another, we could say that the former was saved by the latter. However, if a man is walking towards a pit and is not seeing it for some reason, and another man alerts him to the danger and he avoids the pit, then it is still accurate to say that the former saved the latter.
Perhaps it was because of the reasons you cited, Starman, namely, that seed comes through man, that God was sure to say "seed of a woman" in Genesis. This way we are all very clear on from whom Jesus received His Flesh and Blood. And again, it was that spotless Flesh and Blood that was shed for us.
In 1 Kings 8:19 we see that the Son of David (who at this time was Solomon, but the type/prophecy fits nicely to my way of thinking) will build a temple to honor the Lord. The Lord told David that "the son who will spring from you, he shall build the temple in my honor". Other translations say that "your son, who is your own flesh and blood" will build the temple. Jesus, of course, was the temple that would rise up in three days and He was Flesh of His mother's flesh. Is this definitive typology? No, but I don't think any typology is. Some will accuse me and the CC of seeing what we want to see, and then I would say the same to a Bible Christian.
My purpose for the thread, though, was simply to find how Jesus' full Humanity is explained if He had a "biological" mother who was stained. I love the segue into other stuff, though.
The answer is that Mary found favor by God, because she had a pure heart, was untouched by any man, and was God's chosen for giving birth to Yeshua.
The Bible is full of stories where God chose people to fulfill His prophecies, not because they were without sinful flesh but because they had a pure heart that was set on being obedient to God.
Mary was still of sinful flesh, but kept pure prior to the birth and up through the birth of Yeshua. There was no "sin-seed" to pass along from her womb since there was no human father involved at this point. The Bible states that afterwards she and Joseph consummated the marriage and had other children which would have been half/siblings to Yeshua.
PsyOps
Pixelated
I guess you could argue that it's God's fault for giving us the choice to either sin or not sin; but then the alternative is God playing puppet and dictating our every move. Which He obviously doesn’t. So given it's was/is a choice it's our fault. Again, you could blame God for putting the sin in front of us to choose from, but the same argument stands; God made opposites for everything: male/female, hot/cold, up/down, good/evil. With that he gave us choices between the disparities of those opposites. Ultimately you could blame God for everything. Funny, in the context of this argument, you never want to give God credit for creating us, with a free will.
For the sake of defining the term "sinner", this does not imply that someone has actually committed a sin; as in an infant. It is a trait we inherit by birth; like brown eyes or blonde hair. The word sin doesn’t mean an act against God, it means “separation” from God. This separation occurred in the days of the first defiance of God’s will. From this point on God aimed to separate himself from man. And man, through his defiance of God, chose to keep defying God. Even though the infant is born without having sinned yet, God knows the child will grow up and eventually sin. It’s in our nature. And that’s why God provided a pathway to forgiveness. Could God have just wiped away all of our sins and started over? Of course. But that would take away the free will he gave us to choose. So He put the rule in front of us (Christ), and a choice.
It’s God’s plan. You either accept or you don’t. But blaming God for everything leaves out the vital part of our existence. We are not here except of God. I give God credit for this, not blame.