Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | stjohn | 184920 | ||
Hello all; I hope this question is not redundent; As it pertains to something said here, and maybe it was questioned, if it was, I apologize. But..... I have heard it stated; that the virgin birth accrued so that Jesus would be born "without" a "sin" nature. If this is so: How could He have been tempted? And if not; then..... Why was it a Virgin birth? God bless stj |
||||||
2 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 184935 | ||
Stjohn, You pose the question, in part: “Why was it a Virgin birth?” Because that is what the Lord decreed brother. Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. “It was requisite that is conception should be otherwise than by ordinary generation, that so, so though he partook of the human nature, yet he might escape the corruption and pollution of it, and not be conceived and shapen in iniquity.” – Matthew Henry Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
3 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | stjohn | 184937 | ||
Hello Brother WOS; I have some very personal feelings on this. And although I did want to discuss them with you all. I think, because that it is a very sensitive issue, to say the least. I will keep them in my heart. Thank you Brother. love in Christ stj |
||||||
4 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | Hank | 184939 | ||
stjohn - You are wise to opt to "keep in your heart" personal feelings on the virgin birth of Christ or any other theological topic, for that matter; because, as you apparently have come to recognize, "personal feelings" don't carry much weight on Study Bible Forum. But God's word and sound expositions on it do. I've carried around a bushel of "personal feelings" all my life and haven't been offered anything for them yet. :-) ..... Sir, I'm having trouble following you on your declaration that the virgin birth is a sensitive issue. I've never thought of it as being such. Of course, the scoffers make sport of it, along with other mighty acts of God, but they walk in darkness anyway, so who pays any attention to them? They are the blind leading the blind. But I have never been ashamed to talk about the virgin birth of Jesus Christ nor do I deem it a sensitive issue. It's quite all right on this forum to talk about any issue under the sun so long as the Bible speaks on the issue, and we can back it up solidly with Scripture cited in context. Thanks, by the way, for your rapid response to my other post to you this evening. This is not to chide in any way, but it did strike me as curious why you think that the topic of the virgin birth is sensitive. In thinking of the virgin birth of Jesus, the adjective that readily comes to my mind is glorious. But never sensitive. --Hank | ||||||
5 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | stjohn | 184941 | ||
Hello brother Hank; I have never questioned the validity of the virgin birth. I think I should make this very clear sense I would not want any of my brother or sisters to think otherwise. And I'll answer my own question there .I think it was very simply just to verify His deity. The issue the I would like to discuss, is the question of wether Our Lord was born with a sin nature. And, sense you have apparently, and very graciously I might add, opened that door, I will enter very carefully as not to offend. And believe me brother I Do not want you or any one to think that in any way shape or form would I insinuate something that would or could diminish Our Lord, and I know that you feel the same way. I had, thought it best not to start this conversation on the forum, as you know things can get quite confusing in the hubbub of so many voices. but here goes, I suppose I would have to start with Adam and Eve, I have herd that point about them not having a sin nature and yet they were tempted, and it seems to be a good one. But, does it follow logically, sense they did get the curse of that nature after they sinned. Mary the mother of Our Lord, being in that earthly line, was born with it, so then, Jesus being all God, but also all man, and, a man born in that line, could we not then say that He also was heir to this sin nature. Now this gets hard for me. and frankly brother I'm not sure If we should employ this kind of logic, but to me at least it does follow logically. and I would like answers. and this logically seems to answer them. And it is not a question of faith. I don't like the idea of even associating Our Lord with sin, unless it is to say, He "did not" and "could not" sin, for it was "never" part of gods plain. Having said that. It is hard for me to imagine, the temptation being valid, if Our Lord did not have a sin nature. It seems to me that if He did not have to make a conscious effort, that is, if there was no struggle. How then could He possibly relate to us in the way the Word says that He does. In the garden he sweat as like it was blood and I'm convinced that it was blood. Brother here was a man in anguish looking for a way OUT! He said to them " My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death." and He fell with His Face to the ground "My Father. If it is possible, may this cup be taken from me." I am not suggesting in any way that Our Lord would ever disobey the Father. But man you gotta think he wanted to, and thats the kind of Man that I want to get behind! Someone who is faithful no mater what! well I hope I'm not out of line here but that how I feel about it. No apologies!...... oh, unless I offended someone, in that case..........sorry. Peace stj |
||||||
6 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | BradK | 184942 | ||
Hello stjohn, Welcome from another Northwest native:-) I think the defining verse is Heb. 4:15, which states, "For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin" Nowhere does scripture teach or even imply that Jesus had a sin nature. Being tempted is not the same as possessing a sin nature. The Immaculate conception bypassed -so-to speak- the imputation of sin. Had He been merely "born of a woman", without the "Holy Spirit coming upon her" ,He could not have fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14. Remember, for Jesus to be our Mediator, He had to fulfill 3 qualifications: 1. He must be a man (Heb. 2:14-16); 2. The Mediator between God and man must be sinless; 3. He had to be Divine As to His sinlessness, A.A. Hodge remarks: "Under the law the victim offered on the altar must be without blemish. Christ, who was to offer Himself unto God as a sacrifice for the sins of the world, must be Himself free from sin. The High Priest, therefore, who becomes us, He whom our necessities demand, must be holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners. (Hebrews vii. 26.) He was, therefore, "without sin." (Hebrews iv. 15; 1 Peter ii. 22.) A sinful Saviour from sin is an impossibility. He could not have access to God. He could not be a sacrifice for sins; and He could not be the source of holiness and eternal life to his people. This sinlessness of our Lord, however, does not amount to absolute impeccability. It was not a non potest peccare. If He was a true man He must have been capable of sinning. That He did not sin under the greatest provocation; that when He was reviled He blessed; when He suffered He threatened not; that He was dumb, as a sheep before its shearers, is held up to us as an example. Temptation implies the possibility of sin. If from the constitution of his person it was impossible for Christ to sin, then his temptation was unreal and without effect, and He cannot sympathize with his people." [Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology] Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
7 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | stjohn | 184945 | ||
Hello Brother BradK; thank you for your greeting Neighbor! I have lifted this out of Mr. Hodges' writing This sinlessness of our Lord, however, does not amount to absolute impeccability. It was not a non potest peccare. (If He was a true man He must have been capable of sinning.) That He did not sin under the greatest provocation; that when He was reviled He blessed; when He suffered He threatened not; that He was dumb, as a sheep before its shearers, is held up to us as an example. Temptation implies the possibility of sin. If from the constitution of his person it was impossible for Christ to sin, then his temptation was unreal and without effect, and He cannot sympathize with his people." We all Know that He was sinless, "But How" is the statement that I have indicated possible, If he did not poses this nature? It seems to verify it. God bless stj |
||||||
8 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | BradK | 184958 | ||
Hello stjohn, Not exactly, my friend. We have to be careful here about terms and assumptions! Again, what scripture would show that Christ had a sin nature? Can you demonstrate this absolutely? Put it this way, He had every opportunity TO sin, but He did not! We know He was tempted from accounts such as Matt. 4:1-4 and Heb. 4:15. To say or imply he had a sin nature is to say something entirely foreign to the Word. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
9 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | stjohn | 184960 | ||
Good morning BradK; Please read my post to brother ebrain; I think it explains my position. I couldn't agree more with you about the term... "sin nature"... i.e. ....what we have come to know, what it means to and about us, is most foreign to our Lord and His Word. Because we use it to describe, what it is in us, that makes us sinners. That makes it Impossible, I think, for us to adopt it as a term to describe what it is we are talking about. brother I just don't know what els to call it! Again. Please read my post to ebrain. And thanks Brother! Peace stj |
||||||