Was Mary a Biological Mother or a Surrogate Mother for Jesus?

Then if you believe in the Trinity you are adding to Scripture, since the word "Trinity" does not appear in the Bible and our notions of the Trinity today come from AD 350!

Trying to win an argument by saying that someone is adding to the Bible is not helpful and is, frankly, a poor argument in which you are trying to attack my character and not my argument.

Plus, by your argumentation the following would be true as well: Scripture nowhere says the Word did not connect itself to an egg and became Flesh, thus the Word must have connected itself to the egg. Arguing from silence is not a good way to argue either.

Besides all of this, the writers of the Gospels and Isaiah did not have the knowledge or language at their disposal that we have. The did not know about the intricacies of DNA, chromosomes, and genetics. Instead, they wrote what they knew and did not care about exactly HOW the Word became flesh or HOW a virgin would conceive. They simply stated these things, or, they simply told us that this DID happen.

However, since we do have language to talk about these things, we should utilize it. And since Scripture teaches that Jesus became sarx like we are all sarx, then there must be some continuity in the conception process. Saying otherwise defeats the purpose for having Jesus be human, so that he could be our sacrifice, example, and sharer in our suffering. If Jesus was a different sort of flesh than we are, then his sacrifice is not valid, his example is tainted, and he hasn't shared in our suffering. Since I am not willing to say these things and since Scripture clearly confirms them, I will affirm then that Jesus shared our flesh, meaning that his conception involved an egg and a sperm, the former from Mary, the latter from the Holy Spirit.

 

BB, You first have to establish a biblical link in the genealogies given that Mary is even being linked in them. I find no such link. If you do, cite the reference.

 

HP; Scripture plainly says Jesus is of the seed of David in the flesh and I know you believe scripture. We both know it was of the Holy Ghost and not Joseph, so that leaves Joseph out of the equation, so that only leaves Mary linked to David.

I have no scripture and you know it and neither do you. I do know because I believe scripture that Mary had to be of the seed of David for she was the one who bare a Son called Jesus. Now Mary's father is really unknown for sure but some believe it was Heli. I really do not know, but do know the lineage of Mary has to go back to David to fulfill scripture of which I do have.
Rom 1:3Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

Now, that is about all I know and some I do not know, but I do believe scripture and Rom 1:3 is very plain about the seed of David. The rest, we have to try and come up with how could it have happened and I gave you my best guess.

If you have scripture that debunks my theory, I would be interested. If you are as I am and giving a theory, I like mine pretty good......

BTW; I am holding on to the pulpit to keep from falling..............

BBob,

 

HP: Open your mind into the realm of possibilities BB. Outside ot the dogma of original sin, why could not have God duplicated the DNA from Joseph, or took the sperm from Joseph in his sleep for that matter, and implanted it in the womb of Mary? Lay aside all presuppositions of OS and think ouside the box for just a minute. Is this not a viable solution that would allow for the virgin birth, keep Joseph or Mary from the false charge of fornication, and be completely consistent with the genealogies given?

 

HP: Count me in as one that does. Jesus was a human being, made 'like unto His brethren."................oh yes, and He was God as well.

 

HP: Why don’t you simply ask her to play God and explain the complete Incarnation in minute detail for us finite beings?

 

Do you not believe God could of caused Mary to have a perfect egg, if he could receive someone into heaven in a chariot of fire, or create man in the first place. I do not think that Eve's eggs had those faults until the fall, do you?


BBob,

 

taken from The Virgin Birth [FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Body of Jesus Prepared Within the Womb [/FONT][FONT=&quot]
Hebrews 10:5
[FONT=&quot]“Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me”[/FONT]

Prepare = the fundamental meaning is to put a thing in its appropriate condition, to establish, set up, equip, arrange, prepare, mend. (The Complete Word Study Dictionary)

The genetic blueprint was contained in the complete seed that was planted within the womb of Mary to be arranged and prepared physically for birth. Deity took upon Himself humanity as God the Son was nurtured within. This was prepared of the Father

Galatians 4:4-5
[FONT=&quot]“But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons[/FONT].”

God sent forth his Son – the Son was sent forth in origin from above.
He was ‘made’ of a woman – that is, He was assembled, and nurtured in the womb of a woman.

1 Corinthians 15:45-48[FONT=&quot]“And so it is written, the first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.”[/FONT]

Paul contrasts the two Adams revealing:

[/FONT][FONT=&quot].1. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Their creation or birth is contrasted – the first Adam was created a living soul, the second made a quickening spirit.
2. They are both firstborn, but different in origin.
3.They are different in character as well as origin.
4.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Adams body is referred to as natural and Christ’s as spiritual[/FONT][FONT=&quot] One is of the earth, the second from heaven – the first is a man from the earth, and the second is the Lord from heaven.

John 3:31 and John 8:23
[FONT=&quot]“He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all.” “And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.”[/FONT]



[FONT=&quot]Christ’s Ancestry[/FONT] We all share a common ancestry, a common blood line. All of mankind can trace their roots back to one source – Adam. This blood-line has been corrupted and because all of mankind is born of this same seed line it necessitates the birth of one who has a different ancestry, one who is not corrupted by sin and therefore under the curse of sin. But the messiah who was prophesied to come was to be of the seed of Abraham, from the nation of Israel and of the seed of David, that he might fulfill scripture. How could he be of the seed of Adam, without inheriting the nature of sin? How could He be both Son of God and Son of man? The gospels of Matthew and Luke reveal the genealogy of Christ according to the flesh tracing his ancestry through to Adam, but this ancestry is attributed through Joseph, His adopted father, not through Mary by birth. The Father himself declares Christ’s ancestry.

Hebrews 1:3-6 [FONT=&quot]“Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him”[/FONT]Only through the virgin birth could God bypass the seed line by implanting His seed, complete, perfect and entire, within a virgin’s womb to spend 9 months being formed and nurtured in preparation for ministry. Surely this is the mystery of godliness.

There is much more on this site concerning the Virgin Birth. It is good to see there are others who have seen this wonderful truth that God did the Work. Mary's egg would have contributed to the genetic makeup of Jesus' body, thereby passing on the curse that was pronounced to all mankind.
[/FONT]

 

Eliyahu please give your scriptural support to support your theory that Mary was only a surrogate.

BBob,

 

Can you prove that is not the linage of Mary??

Also, would you please explain this scripture and why would you deny it?

Rom 1:3Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;


BBob,

 

HP: Certainly! I believe all eggs are perfect, just not moral nor do they have ‘sin’ attached to them. What men see as physical defects from the fall may be an assset to fallen man, not a detriment. They might bring out characteristics needed to be exhibited by men in our fallen world to bring us closer to being illuminated by the Spirit of God himself for purposes known only to Himself. Look at the blindness of Fanny Crosby!! I have been blessed by what some evidently see as a sinful exhibition of fallen traits.

Oh Lord, help us to distinguish between the moral and the physical.

 

For those that are interested, read Albert Barnes "Barnes Notes" on “The Gospels” pp3 to see the lineage of Joseph laid out both in written from as well as an insightful diagram that depict both Jacob and Heli as fathers of Joseph. It is said that Joseph was the legal son and heir of Heli and the real son of Jacob. An interesting notion indeed.

 

1. Check some commentaries out. I already quoted to you from Scofield but you ignored it. It gave some fairly good evidence why Luke 3 gives the genealogy of Mary. Other commentaries do also. Just do some reading on it.

2. Your real problem is not in the genealogy at all, but rather in Mary--if she is sinless or a sinner.
Mary was a sinner. She, as a sinner, rejoiced in God her Saviour. She offered a sin offering in the days of her purification according to the Law. This was not just custom. It was the Law. The Law has a purpose. The sin offering had to be offered. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin. She needed to offer a sin offering for the same reason she needed to be purified. Why did they need to go through a purification process?

3. There are other statements in your first paragraph that are pure conjecture and have no basis in fact.

4. Yes, God ordained that the egg of Mary should become the body of Jesus. He used Mary; He could have used any young woman of that time, but he chose Mary. The virgin did not have to be sinless; she had to be a Jewish virgin.

Isaiah 7:14 A virgin shall conceive and bring forth a son.
In that one verse is all that we need to know.
1. It was a virgin that God used.
2. The virgin conceived. That means that an egg was used.
3. She bore a son, while yet being a virgin. She both conceived and bore a son. The two terms are different and refer to two different events that happened nine months apart. Thus the egg was fertilized and nine months later Christ was born. This fits in perfectly with Matthew one.

Matthew 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
--The egg (or Christ incarnate) that was in Mary was conceived.
He was conceived of the Holy Spirit.
It was miraculous in nature, supernatural and divine.

Matthew 1:22-23 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
--It was a fulfillment of prophecy.

 

HP: An excellent answer I would say.:thumbs:

 

[FONT=&quot]More from The Virgin Birth

The question must be asked, was the virgin birth the result of the fertilization of two seeds – the egg cell of the virgin Mary, and the incorruptible seed of God, or did the Father place the complete seed within her womb to be nourished and formed?

Fertilization is the joining of two seeds – male and female, creating a new life. Conception is the fertilized egg being placed within the uterus. I believe the virgin birth is unique and miraculous because it necessitated God the Father placing the pure, incorruptible, perfect and complete seed within the womb of a woman.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

The virgin birth is not humanity taking on deity, but deity taking on humanity. In genetic engineering man can genetically change the germ-line or reproductive cells that effect future generations without changing the somatic cells, and vice versa. God could have supernaturally removed sin from the female egg within Mary’s womb that would be fertilized without violating her sinful human nature. Or, He placed a complete seed within her womb to be nourished and formed within, but that was completely in origin from above.[/FONT]