The Birth and Nature of Christ

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Heavenly Pilgrim, Jan 23, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    HP: I would like to start this off as a follow up of DHK's thread on a similiar note which was closed. I will start with comments made by Linda as her post went unanswered.


    HP: Sickness etc is indeed passed down through the depraved physical being of man. That is not sin. That is the effects of sin. Sin merits the punishment of God. Do you think God would be just to punish you because you were born physically handicapped or because you inherited a terrible disease? The problem you exemplify is the Augustinian error that sin lies in the constitution of the flesh as opposed to the will. The will, not the sensibilities or the flesh, is where sin is birthed and resides.




    HP: Is it any wonder how we perpetuate the myth of original sin? Here is a clear verse that simply states that all have sinned, and says NOTHING about a sin nature in the least, and yet as Linda does here, so many read their presupposition of a ‘sin nature’ or OS into the text. I suppose it is because they have heard it done so often in the pulpit.
     
  2. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was also charged with heresy by DHK on the basis of stating that the DNA or sperm of Joseph may well have been used to create the physical body of Jesus. I was told that if the sperm of Joseph was used that would be tantamount to saying Jesus was the product of fornication. As far as I know DHK has allowed the ‘heresy’ charge to stand without any retraction.

    I would like to ask the list, if any would charge a man with fornication if his sperm was used to fertilize an egg in a laboratory and then surgically implanted in the womb of a women the man, who donated the sperm, never knew the women?


    The question concerning the genealogy of Christ is also another side issue. I have seen no verifiable evidence whatsoever that either of the two genealogies of Christ were that of Mary’s. I would have hoped that it would be self evident from the genealogies in Scripture that it is the man that is the focus of genealogies involving the Jewish race, not the women. Is there any on the list that would venture to set forth an example to the contrary?
     
  3. Doubting Thomas

    Doubting Thomas
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,616
    Likes Received:
    6
    Without getting bogged down in a discussion about the 'sin nature' (my view is closer to that of the Eastern Fathers and to classical Wesleyan-Arminians than to Augustine), I'll simply comment on the geneology question. It's my understanding that both geneologies--in Luke and Matthew--are Joseph's rather than Mary's. The difference has to do with Joseph's legal father versus natural father, and I believe one of the church Father's first mentioned this (can't remember who). At any rate, I read an article on this a while back (and had even heard that earlier in a bible study about 7 years ago). If I'm not mistaken the same article mentioned that Mary's parents Joachim and Anna were also descendents of David (I believe the Protoevangelium of James also mentions this, but I'll have to double check) and that Mary and Joseph are distant cousins.

    I'll get back with you if I can learn otherwise...
     
  4. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    Shall we stir and add to the pot a little more? Oh yes, there is still another topic that has been raised by DHK and some others I believe, that has been a topic of discussion before but obviously needs to be addressed again. What about this curse of Jeconiah, and would this in fact of prevented Joseph from being a rightful heir to the throne of David? I say no.
     
  5. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    What if in Luke the parentheses which was placed by translators was placed incorrectly and it should of been placed.
    And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age, (being as was supposed the son of Joseph)

    which was the son of Eli..

    which would be saying that Jesus was the son of Heli.

    Luke 3:23 "And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, ..who was the son of Heli,"

    Neither Matt or Luke ever says that Joseph begat Jesus, does it?

    It says Jacob begat Joseph who was the husband of Mary, who gave birth to Jesus. Why did it not say "Joseph begat Jesus"??

    The Jewish schools who taught the Talmud torah on 77:4 says that Heli was the father of Mary, if what I read is correct.

    Is there anyone who has the actual reading of the Talmud torah 77:4, so we could read it for ourselves??

    BBob,

     
    #5 Brother Bob, Jan 23, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2008
  6. Doubting Thomas

    Doubting Thomas
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,616
    Likes Received:
    6
  7. cowboymatt

    cowboymatt
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    0
    I can give you a quote from the Talmud, but "Talmud Torah" does not exist as the name of a Talmudic tractate. Check your source to see if there is a different tractate name.
     
  8. Matt Black

    Matt Black
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,141
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think Eusebius covers this in some depth in his Church History but I can't remember what he says:eek: Will try and look it up when I get home
     
  9. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are no parenthesis in the original Greek text.
    What if in Luke the parentheses which was placed by translators was placed incorrectly and it should of been placed.
    And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age, (being as was supposed the son of Joseph)

    1. Num 27:8, "Therefore, tell the Israelites; If a man dies without leaving a son, you shall let his heritage pass on to his daughter."
    2. Num 36:6-7, "This is what the Lord commands with regard to the daughters of Salphahad: They may marry anyone they please, provided they marry into a clan of their ancestral tribe, so that no heritage of the Israelites will pass from one tribe to another, but all the Israelites will retain their own ancestral heritage."


    1. Matthew gives us the legal line from Abraham through David and Solomon to Joseph, Jesus' legal father (Matthew 1:1-17). Luke, a physician, gives us his genealogy from Adam to David-but then takes a surprising turn through the second surviving son of Bathsheba, Nathan, and brings us to Heli, the father of Mary (Luke 3:23-28; Jerusalem Talmud, Chag. 77,4). The specific exceptions noted in the Torah regarding the daughters of Zelophehad are anticipatory of this situation (Numbers 26:33; 27:1-11; 36:2-12).
    BBob, gotta go to the Gymn, be back later.
     
  10. standingfirminChrist

    standingfirminChrist
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joseph's sperm cell could not have been used as Jesus would have been fully human.

    Mary's egg could not have been used as Scripture clearly shows all men born to women are unclean.

    John Calvin said:
    Albert Barnes:
     
  11. Matt Black

    Matt Black
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Newsflash: Jesus was fully human; He wasn't half-human like Mr Spock. He was also fully God.
     
  12. standingfirminChrist

    standingfirminChrist
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    News Flash... Had Jesus been of Joseph's sperm cell and Mary's egg, He would not have been God at all.
     
  13. cowboymatt

    cowboymatt
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ugh. There is not a single Biblical passage that indicates with no doubt that damnable sin is passed genetically. Please stop saying that there is, because there is not. Jesus would not have been blemished had an egg been used, since dambable sin is not passed down genetically. You and many others are reading your theological concept of original sin on texts that don't in fact support this.

    To Brother Bob: I have to go to the library today, so I'll look up the passage you have indicated. "Chag." is short for "Chagigah" by the way.
     
  14. standingfirminChrist

    standingfirminChrist
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Keep telling yourself that, cowboymatt, and you will never see the truth that is written in the Word of God.
     
  15. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't know about you or anyone else, but I read about sin in the bible, and have never read some old texts about it.
    Just how do you think each person inherits the sin nature?
     
  16. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is from the other thread, and it's still an open question to Ann,



     
  17. standingfirminChrist

    standingfirminChrist
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb, and yet Christ still had to die for him. Why? Because he was born with the sin nature. All flesh is under that curse and susceptible to sin

    There was only one flesh born on this earth that could not sin. And all other flesh hung Him on a cross.
     
  18. standingfirminChrist

    standingfirminChrist
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Searching through my many books, I cannot find one instance of Abbott, Barnes, Calvin, Clarke, Bounds, Easton, Edersheim, Fausset, Finney, Osborn, Sir Robert Anderson, Smith, Spurgeon, or Torrey making mention of Mary's egg in any of their commentaries.


    Where did the doctrine of Mary's egg originate? Certainly not the Word of God. Nor from any of those listed above.
     
    #18 standingfirminChrist, Jan 23, 2008
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2008
  19. standingfirminChrist

    standingfirminChrist
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Clarence Larkin - Rightly Dividing The Word; 1920
     
    #19 standingfirminChrist, Jan 23, 2008
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2008
  20. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,191
    Likes Received:
    374
    The Scriptures say in Hebrews 10:5, "but a body hast thou prepared me:" God prepared a body for Jesus. That's God's Word.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...