I believe it is a part of Hebrews 5. Jesus the Son is not qualified to be our High Priest except He be one of us (which is the point of verses 5-6).
Jesus was not made perfect through suffering except for that office (He was already morally perfect in every way, but the Sonship of Christ does not establish His priesthood....He had to be one of us).
Odd. The Bible says exactly the opposite. I'm not sure where you have read that idea and it's a philosophy I'm really not interested in learning more about. It sounds suspiciously like Docetism.
That's nothing but Roman Catholic made up tradition, and it couldn't be any further from the truth. The reason he was born of a virgin was so that he would not have an Earthly father, and therefore would not receive an inheritance from any human. Read Romans 8 and Hebrews 1
The fall of Adam brought the judgement from God upon all in the likeness of Adam to have the same result, sin natures, save for jesus, due to Virgin Birth.
Not according to Paul. The explanation you extract one verse from was proving this point - "But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep."
I was thinking the same. What @Yeshua1 is suggesting is an old heresy just wrapped in more deceptive language. Saying Jesus was human (but not human like us) is just as much a denial of Christ's humanity as saying Jesus has a divine nature (just not like God) is a denial of His divinity.
Exactly. And I believe all those old heresies shared one common faulty foundation.
Every one of them thought it was impossible for a sinless spirit to indwell a sinful body without that Spirit becoming sinful. That has contributed to almost all the error regarding this issue
That's why the Roman Catholics made up the doctrine of Immaculate Conception. They just couldn't understand how the sinless Christ could indwell a sinful body. But they knew that his body at least was descended from Mary who also had a sinful body. Wallah now all of a sudden she's born without a sinful body
But one thing I don't think any of them took into account then or even now, is the indwelling of The Believer by the Holy Spirit. Peter said we become partakers of the divine nature, which means the sinless spirit of God indwells our sinful and corrupt body even today. That doesn't mean the Holy Spirit becomes a sinner
I think Scriputre best describes nature two ways – “flesh” and “spirit”. That which is born flesh is flesh, and that which is born spirit is spirit. Human nature is the flesh. Christ took upon Himself this nature. It is the desires of the flesh. And there is biblical evidence that this desire is not always in accordance with the will of God (although not sin in itself). For example, Jesus was tempted to satisfy the desires of the flesh in the wilderness but He overcame temptation. He desired in the flesh not to suffer and die, praying that if possible the cup would pass but not His will but the Father’s be done.
Christ took upon Himself human nature when He became flesh - the Logos (the Word, the Life) becoming human.
This is the One nature (the Life, spiritual life, the Word) taking on another (human nature). The Catholic Church argued, debated, and developed a philosophy about how these two natures existed without mixture (mostly a philosophical argument). But Scripture does not separate the two natures in Christ. He is God. He is man. And, although the Catholics will always reject the idea, Scripture teaches that God the Son suffered and died a physical death (not suffered “in His human nature”, but suffered).
Until discussing topics on this board I had never realized just how much RCC doctrine undermines much of contemporary Protestant thought.