Son of Man

[webdog]

It seems your view that man is not born spiritually dead (separated from God) is informing your view here

Possibly. I see the above as a total contradiction and an oxymoron...death is the ceasing of life, and someone cannot be created dead. It's an impossibility.

But Christ, although man, was unique. He was totally man but did not have 2 human parents, yet the Bible says he was totally man.

One does not need two human parents, they only need an egg and sperm coming together.

Man is born spiritually dead; Christ was not born spiritually dead just as he had no human father (and I believe, no sin nature)

Like I said earlier, I used to believe this very thing (except being created dead), but this makes having a sin nature physiological.

So Christ can still be 100% man even without all the conditions men are born in, simply because he's the "unique" Son of God.

Being the unique Son of God and being 100% human are apples and oranges.

 

[webdog]

Your statement says 'all humans are created spiritually dead'..... but the first human, Adam, was not created spiritually dead

I was quoting the original sin position...I do not hold to this position.

Physical and spiritual death passed upon all humanity since Adam because of his choice to sin.

...yet Christ is part of this humanity, and He died physically. The logical conclusion to your position would have to be Christ being spiritually dead as well.

Jesus, the second 'Adam', kept the innocence of his estate by never sinning.

So, if one doesn't sin, they can do the same thing? How can they be created spiritually separated then?

The first Adam wasn't created to die, but with the law (thou shalt not eat) came the judgement (in the day that you do, you will die). Being made after the first Adam, and inheriting (from him) our predisposition to rebell against God by our will, we do sin because of choice and are sinners by predisposition of our heart.

The second Adam was created to die. The Bible states Christ was tempted in every way we are. His deity kept Him from rebelling against the Father, it was His choice.
You lost me with we "are sinners by the disposition of our heart". The very definition of sinner is one who sins.

 

[windcatcher]

As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.
The heart of man is wicked, desperately evil, who can know it.

Jesus, in his humanity, had all the same excuses which Adam did before Adam's fall: He could get thirsty, he could get hungry.
(It is foolish here to add conjecture like 'could Adam have an accident and get injured like falling and breaking a leg..... or falling against a stone and dying with a brain hemorrage.)

Jesus was as fully God as God is: He could have called 10,000 angels to set him free.... or he could have willed it and done it without them. But he willingly submitted his authority and power to the will of His Father and submitted his glory by devine right, to the bondage and weakness of flesh to suffer and to die. His flesh, in his estate of innocence, he willing submitted it to death: He became a living sacrifice.... because while yet living and fully endowed with power as God, he made a choice and He willingly submitted his innocent flesh on our behalf (in full recognition of the consequences)..... exchanging his innocence for our filthy sinful rags of guilt and gave to us his garment of innocence and righteousness. When he submitted himself to die, in obediance to the Father, he knowingly drank of the bitter cup, he saw pass before him in the garden of Gessemane, and was abandoned by all that is pure and holy in the moment he became sin for us. In a sense he tasted both death and hell for us in that moment. He who had been and was and would ever be our fountain of living water, thirsted as our judgement for sin was heaped upon him. In that moment, he was as fully human as he ever was or will be, bearing our sin and in complete submission to the Father, not guilty of sin in himself.

 

[Marcia]

Possibly. I see the above as a total contradiction and an oxymoron...death is the ceasing of life, and someone cannot be created dead. It's an impossibility.

Spiritually dead is not physically dead - death means separation. Spiritual death means separated from God. We are not born into a relationship with God and we are not born reconciled to God. We are born spiritually separated from God.

One does not need two human parents, they only need an egg and sperm coming together.

I got news for you! That is 2 human parents - egg and sperm had to come from humans. :tongue3: Jesus did not have human father origins, however you want to put it. Yet he was 100% man.

Like I said earlier, I used to believe this very thing (except being created dead), but this makes having a sin nature physiological

.

I don't see that.

Being the unique Son of God and being 100% human are apples and oranges.

Okay, he was 100% human but had no human father (or sperm origin) and no sin nature. Those are two things all men have. Yet he was still 100% human.

 

[Hawkins]

OK.. this is going to sound like a dumb question I'm sure..

I was reading John this afternoon.. and I get the "Son of God" title for Jesus.. because he's God's son!

But I just do not get "Son of Man".. Man's son??? I just don't understand. Can somebody please help me understand that title for Jesus?

Thanks!

CJ

Because the ranking is Jesus centered. Names are given after Jesus.

Son of God - dispatched ususally without a born body = usually the angels.
Son of Man - dispatched with a born body = prophets.

Jesus = the Head of both lines. He's capable of dispatching both angels and prophets.

 

[windcatcher]

Spiritually dead is not physically dead - death means separation. Spiritual death means separated from God. We are not born into a relationship with God and we are not born reconciled to God. We are born spiritually separated from God.


I got news for you! That is 2 human parents - egg and sperm had to come from humans. :tongue3: Jesus did not have human father origins, however you want to put it. Yet he was 100% man.


.

I don't see that.



Okay, he was 100% human but had no human father (or sperm origin) and no sin nature. Those are two things all men have. Yet he was still 100% human.

In full agreement here!

Jesus was as much human as Adam was before the fall.
Before the fall, Adam was without sin and was innocent.
Before the fall, Adam was not separated from God.
Before the fall, Adam knew nothing of death or judgement.
Before the fall, Adam knew nothing of fear nor of a world less than perfect or beast that kill or insects which bite or disease which cause sickness or poisonous plants or vines with thornes or pesky weeds with no apparent purpose.
Before the fall, Adam was as much human as he was after the fall...... yet without all these judgements. It was by the fall of Adam that these judgements were passed on him and on the seed which would follow him and it was by the fall that man inherited a heart predisposed to sin.
The first Adam was not created with a predisposition to sin and neither was Jesus, who is the 'second Adam'.
But the first Adam lost his inheritance and reaped judgement for all mankind by sinning.
The 'second Adam' i.e. Jesus was made from the seed of woman without man and took his inheritance directly from his Father who was God. He was as fully human as the first Adam but, as God in the flesh, He submitted his power and authority to the will of His Father (God) in perfect obediance (unlike Adam) and was innocent of sin; He took upon himself the punishment of our sin which is death that through believing in Him we pass from death to life.

Like that sweet hymn:
He paid the debt He did not owe,
I owed a debt I could not pay,
I needed someone
Who could wash my sins away.
and....
What can wash away my sins
Nothing but the blood of Jesus
Oh precious is that flow
That washes white as snow
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

Oh for a thousand tongues to sing
My great Redeemer's praise
The glories of my God and King
The triumph of His days
My gracious Master and my God
Assist me to proclaim
And spread through all the earth abroad
The honour of Thy Name
Jesus the Name that calms my fears
And bids my sorrows cease
'Tis music in the sinner's ears
'Tis life and health and peace.

Oh....... I feel like its Resurrection Sunday already!!!!!!
Praise God!:love2:

 

[webdog]

Spiritually dead is not physically dead - death means separation. Spiritual death means separated from God. We are not born into a relationship with God and we are not born reconciled to God. We are born spiritually separated from God.

From Adam on down, spiritually dead people got that way the same...by sinning. The wages of sin is death.

I got news for you! That is 2 human parents - egg and sperm had to come from humans. Jesus did not have human father origins, however you want to put it. Yet he was 100% man.

...yet Christ being fully human, had only one...and Adam and Eve had none...and they were all human. The Holy Spirit could have provided the sperm to fertilize Mary's egg. And then there is cloning...

 

[Marcia]

From Adam on down, spiritually dead people got that way the same...by sinning. The wages of sin is death.
.

Yes, spiritual death was passed down just as physical death was. Why would physical death be passed down and not spiritual death? All men since the Fall are born mortal in a body that will age and die and are born spiritually dead.

..yet Christ being fully human, had only one...and Adam and Eve had none...and they were all human. The Holy Spirit could have provided the sperm to fertilize Mary's egg. And then there is cloning...

Not sure what your point is here. You made a comment about how could Jesus be fully human and I was trying to point out that Jesus could be fully human without necessarily having all the qualities of men such as a sin nature and two human parents.

 

[CoJoJax]

OK.. I'm completely lost in this post now.

Anyway.. I saw somewhere in the beginning where somebody said "Son of Man" is like saying He "has the nature of" man. Why not just say "The Nature of Man" instead? I guess I just don't get the "Son" part in relevance to "Man", as in, humankind.

I don't know.. I guess I'm just destined to not get this.. :BangHead:

 

[Jedi Knight]

OK.. I'm completely lost in this post now.

Anyway.. I saw somewhere in the beginning where somebody said "Son of Man" is like saying He "has the nature of" man. Why not just say "The Nature of Man" instead? I guess I just don't get the "Son" part in relevance to "Man", as in, humankind.

I don't know.. I guess I'm just destined to not get this.. :BangHead:

Howdy CoJoJax! Back to the topic......Son of Man is a title from the book of Daniel. Daniel 7:13-14 "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed. Matthew 24:30 At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. John 5:27 and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man. The Pharisees knew what He meant and didn't like it.......not one bit.

 

[Allan]

OK.. I'm completely lost in this post now.

Anyway.. I saw somewhere in the beginning where somebody said "Son of Man" is like saying He "has the nature of" man. Why not just say "The Nature of Man" instead? I guess I just don't get the "Son" part in relevance to "Man", as in, humankind.

I don't know.. I guess I'm just destined to not get this.. :BangHead:

Essentially when refering to a person or angel -
Son of God simply refers to being - of or from God.
(this phrase does not necessarily refer to lineage, since God is a spirit and they do not pro-create via se*ual union, but of someone being connected with Him either directly as Jesus and believers - being in God - personal relationship; as well as being indirectly connected like the 'holy angels' - Kinship. However in the NT the phrase, when refering to men, IS speaking of begetting or birth and that birth is in fact spiritual making believers not just in kinship but of sonship)


Son of Man simply refers to a person being - of or from mankind
(though not necessarily of lineage - IE..one begat the other, but again, of kinship, or better, of the same family)

Now there is also a distinction in and of both phrases usages as well, which not only reflect a relationship or kinship, but in which these two phrases are used as titles which reveal the only and true Messiah. (not only by usage of them to oneself but also by fulfillment of scriptural prophecies regarding the one to whom the titles refer)

 

[Marcia]

OK.. I'm completely lost in this post now.

Anyway.. I saw somewhere in the beginning where somebody said "Son of Man" is like saying He "has the nature of" man. Why not just say "The Nature of Man" instead? I guess I just don't get the "Son" part in relevance to "Man", as in, humankind.

I don't know.. I guess I'm just destined to not get this.. :BangHead:

Because "son of" in hebrew means having the same nature as. It's an expression. Saying he had the nature of man does not make sense in Hebrew (so I'm guessing).

For example:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Ben Chanan[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]From the Hebrew, meaning “son of grace, gracious.”

[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Ben Ezra[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]From the Hebrew, meaning “son of salvation.” (l Chronicles 4:17)
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
Binyamin[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]From the Hebrew, meaning “son of my right hand,” having the connotation of strength. In the Bible (Genesis 35:18), the youngest of Jacob’s twelve sons.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica][/FONT]http://www.circumcision.net/Heb_Names_BC.htm

This is one reason why they picked up stones to kill Jesus when he was said he was the Son of God - they knew this was claiming the same nature as God.

 

[AnotherBaptist]

While we can't possibly know all the intricacies about the Son of God's nature, there are a couple of passages which can help each Christian's theology immensely:

Matthew 16:13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He was asking His disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" 14 And they said, "Some {say} John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets." 15 He *said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

1 Corinthians 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

Both detail the dual nature of Jesus Christ. Paul's passage is a bit harder to understand but is worth the effort, especially if you want to understand everything else in that context.

 

[Hawkins]

Jesus = the Head of both lines. He's capable of dispatching both angels and prophets.

Moreover, who has the authority to send both angels and prophets? Only God has that authority. As a result, Jesus Christ is God the Son. Proven!