Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Male seed sinful, but not female ovum? | NT general Archive 1 | restate | 191129 | ||
Yo, Doc, In ordinary procreation a human spirit is created at the moment the body is conceived ("Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit." John 3:6), but the spirit of Jesus was never created. He has always existed at the right hand of the Father. Therefore, Christ must needs have been conceived of a virgin. He alone came down from heaven (John 3:13). At his incarnation he laid aside all his prerogatives of omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence to become the spirit of a man-child in one of the virgin's ova. The Roman church does have a doctrine called "the immaculate conception". They are talking about Mary herself being conceived immaculately, as her mother was supposed to have been cleansed in some way before conceiving Mary, thus making her fit to conceive the Christ when she grew up. As you say, this "Maryolatry" is totally outside of scripture, and it is therefore discredited as a biblical doctrine. All such ideas are superfluous, since they are creations of man, trying to doctrinally prevent Jesus from inheriting something that is not inherent in the first place, namely a fallen nature. We should be able to see that if a fallen nature were inheritable, then Jesus would have been disobedient as well. To restate, depravity is not imbedded in the nature of good and upright babies created in the image and likeness of the Father of spirits (Hebrews 12:9). Rather, all, except for the Lord Jesus Christ, sin and fall short of the glory of God in response to temptation and we thus incur a carnal nature just like the first two of us did, by experiencing disobedience. Come back? Restate |
||||||
2 | Male seed sinful, but not female ovum? | NT general Archive 1 | Hank | 191145 | ||
Restate - What your doctrine entails and supports is the creation of a _tertium quid_, a "third thing," being neither fully God nor fully man. This train of thought runs counter to orthodoxy and thus can be rightfully called heresy. May I admonish you to stay well within the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine, if you please. And if it does not please you to choose sound doctrine on which to base your theological conclusions, please choose another Forum that permits heresy to be promulgated. We do not. Study the guidelines laid down for SBF and comply, or move on. --Hank | ||||||
3 | Male seed sinful, but not female ovum? | NT general Archive 1 | restate | 191158 | ||
Steve and Hank! Now those are "come-backs", I'll say! I appreciate the education, Guys. I've looked up the heresies y'all mentioned, and was linked to two others plus the orthodox view, the Chalcedonian Creed, with which I agree, except for calling popes "holy fathers" and Mary "the mother of God". I thought the comments I'd made would have established that I believe that Jesus was and is both fully God and fully man, although I did fail to mention that he had two natures in one person; and I can see how the wording was misunderstood. Thanks for pointing it out. I can use that precaution in other venues in which I'm involved. Any other contributions will also be appreciated. As to whether Christ had a human mind, if he hadn't, he couldn't have grown in wisdom as is stated in Luke 2:52, for he would have already had all wisdom at conception when his Spirit was incarnated. His two natures were evident as his two wills were exhibited in his prayers in the Garden of Gethsemane, "Not my will but thine be done." His human nature willed to live, but his divine nature willed to obey the Father even unto torture and death, if there was no other way. Let me restate an earlier question of mine: If a sinful nature is inherent in all the seed of the man Adam, HOW was it not inherent in THE SEED OF THE WOMAN, Jesus Christ? We all know he had to be sinless to qualify as the innocent sacrifice for the sins of the whole world. But, that only explains WHY he SHOULD not inherit a sinful nature - if it were inheritable at all. Now, somebody please tell me HOW he escaped this alleged natural inheritance with which all other humans are supposedly conceived. Mary and all her mothers before her are daughters of Adam - and of Eve, who was first in the transgression in Eden; so surely Mary would have passed her sinful nature on to her firstborn son, if it had been transferable, even though he was not sired by a man. I still haven't seen a jot or a tittle of scripture that shows that carnality is bred through men but not through women. Some have said it's because Eve, having been deceived was not responsible. Sounds like a condescending male chauvinistic blonde joke to me. Eve may have been blonde, but she was not a dizzy, dinggy blonde. As God's final genesis creation, she was a masterpiece of intelligence and wisdom, as well as beauty and personality. Had to be! Come back? Restate |
||||||
4 | Male seed sinful, but not female ovum? | NT general Archive 1 | skccab | 191175 | ||
Hiya Restate I started to answer a few days ago, but I could not find my scriptural references (still can't). But here goes anyway - Women don't have seeds, men have seeds. Jesus was not conceived of a human male seed, he was conceived of the Holy Spirit by the will of God. The sin nature is inherited through the male seed for it was the man who transgressed by an act of the will in disobedience. Eve was deceived, Adam was not. (Notice that nowhere in the Bible does it state that the Holy Spirit even used an egg from Mary, only that she was "overshadowed" by the Spirit and conceived.) OK guys, if I've made a mistake - go ahead and correct, I'm a big girl, I can handle it :-). |
||||||