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

I have provided the Scripture several times, cowboymatt.

Job clearly states that nothing clean is born to a woman. What do you take that to mean? It is more that figure of speech or imagery.

 

It can mean a variety of things. But you have taken it out of its context. Job was written in poetry. Perhaps it simply means that a baby has to be cleansed when it is born. Is it speaking of the virgin birth? No! Is it even related to the virgin birth? No! You take a string of texts, take them out of their contexts and put them together in order to make a case. That is not rightly dividing the truth.

 

Let me see if I have the references correct: Job 15.14 and 25.4. Clearly in both of those verses "born of a woman" is parallel to "man" and should be understood simply as "human." Parallelism is a common part of Hebrew poetry (and DHK is right, genre is hugely important when interpreting the Bible, as is context).

Secondly, the point of both passages is that humans are not righteous or pure. What makes humans unrighteous and impure? Sin, i.e., disobedience. Not flesh, being human, sinful nature, sex, nor genetics. Want proof? 1 Peter 3.18a "For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous..." So what makes someone unrighteous? Not flesh, being human, sinful nature, sex, nor genetic. Nope; committing sins make one unrighteous!

So the verse from Job aren't good enough to prove the idea of damnable sin being passed down through genetics!

 

Psalms 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.

Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

If you and DHK were rightly dividing the Word of Truth, you would see nothing born of a woman is clean, they are all stained with sin as soon as they are born.

Christ could not be born of a woman's egg or He too would be numbered with the unrighteous.

 

Romans 8:8-14 (KJV)
8: So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9: But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
10: And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11: But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
12: Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
13: For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
14: For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

1 Peter 1:23 (KJV)
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

 

I reckon they think some men on this earth are born righteous and not in need of Salvation. If that were the case, Christ would not have had to die.

 

"As it is written, there is none righteousness, no not one."

And you actually twist this Scripture to include Christ?
Don't you think that is a tad blasphemous?

 

Do you actually take pleasure in twisting my words, DHK? In false accusations against me?

Nowhere in that statement did I say Christ was unrighteous. Nowhere.

I said if men were born righteous, Christ would not have had to die.

As I said before, if you cannot say something nice about me, don't talk about me at all.

You accusing me of blasphemy is really sad.

 

If we weren't born from the corruptible seed then Jesus wouldn't have had to be our sacrifice. We are born with sin nature and that has been passed down from Adam and Eve.

John 3:5-7 (KJV)
5: Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6: That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7: Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

We are all born from the corrupted seed.

 

Amen, The Scribe!

 

Note who it is in Psalm 58.3 that are estranged and go astray, not everyone, just the wicked. Again, this is poetry and the clear intent of the psalmist is to indicate how wicked the wicked are. Psalm 58.3 is not a verse that indicates everyone is born in damnable sin through genetics.

Romans 3.10 does not dispute what I have claimed all along, that everyone sins. I am just not willing to read my theological heritage onto the Bible. Romans 3.10 does not say that sin is passed down genetically.

 

Again, this passage does not talk about damnable sin being passed down genetically. Instead it is talking about being born again, surrendering all of one's self to Jesus and living for him. This is how one is born of the Spirit, through believing in Jesus. Where is the genetic passing of damnable sin.

And since when did sin nature = sin?

 

See how you take Scripture out of context.
First you quote Romans 3:10. Look further down at the context. What about Romans 3:23ff, which we are all so familiar with:

Romans 3:23-25 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

Are you saying that Christ is included in the "all" here that have sinned; that Christ is a sinner, just because he was born of Mary? Again, it is blasphemous.
But what did Christ do, and why was this statement made?
The subject of this passage is back in verse 22: "All who believe" are justified through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ. All have sinned (except Christ). But all who have believed in the sinless Christ, who has provided their redemption he has freely justified. He could not do that unless he was perfect man and perfect God at one and the same time. He could not be perfect man, unless he was the perfect man who could relate to all of man's griefs, sorrows, temptations, trials, etc., including all the ones starting from the fertilization of the egg onward. If not, where would humanity start? Humanity starts at conception. That is when he became the perfect man--when he was conceived as one.

Then, after paying the price for our sins, with his blood. He took that blood and paid the penalty for our sins. Thus the verse says: God has "set him forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood."
Propitiation means satisfaction. The demands of God were legally satisfied by the payment of the blood of Christ, blood that was shed at the cross. That blood could only be shed because Christ was the perfect, sinless Son of Man. He could only have that perfect humanity if he had been born of Mary; the fertilized egg of Mary--inheriting a complete and full humanity from her. He was "conceived" by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary.
All that believe in him are justified, for God has made Him to be a propitiation through faith in his blood.

To deny his complete humanity is wrong.
To deny his complete deity is wrong.
To deny that he was completely human and God at one and the same time is wrong, for he was both. He was the God-man.

 

The Romans 8 passage does not talk about damnable sin being passed down genetically. Instead it indicates, rather clearly, that those who are in the flesh, that is controlled by the flesh, cannot please God. And if you want to push "in the flesh" too far, then you have to deal with the Jesus not being able to please God since the Word became flesh. Paul's clear point, however is that living after the flesh (Rom 8.12) is what causes death and damnation, not being human. Again, where is the proof of the genetic passage of damnable sin?

The 1 Peter passage is clearly talking about being born again, not being born the first time. Again, this passage does not talk about damnable sin being passed down genetically.

 

To say He was born sharing Mary's sinful flesh is wrong.

Mary's egg would have contributed to His flesh, making Him a sinner just like every man woman and child who has ever been born into this world.

 

Its 3.30 AM Eastern time - do you people ever sleep over there ?

 

This is sad SFIC. Look closely at what you said:

1. Rom.3:10 As it is written there is none righteous, no not one.

2. Christ could not be born of a woman's egg or he too would be numbered with the unrighteous.

It is this last statement that is blasphemous, and you connect it with Romans 3:10 taking Scripture out of context again. For Christ was born of Mary's seed according to Isa.7:14 and Mat.1:20 which you refuse to believe.

I therefore point that out to you and you come back and say:

The sad thing is, SFIC, is your connection with Christ being a sinner. Yes you have done that. I just demonstrated it. You may have done it unwittingly because of your unbelief in the doctrine of the virgin belief. But it is there.
I have explained it in more detail in yet another post. Your taking Scripture out of its context is doing you more harm than good.

 

Prove this biblically! You have not done so. Where in the Bible does it way that damnable sins are passed down genetically? It doesn't anywhere! Jesus shared in our humanity, the same humanity that you and I have, the sort of humanity that starts with an egg and a sperm. The miracle of the virgin birth is that the Holy Spirit provided the seed, not that there was an insertion of a not-like-the-rest-of-us fetus or prefertilized egg into Mary. Either of these options means that Jesus was not fully human, which would void the cross, Jesus' example, and his sharing in our sufferings.

 

LOL, Roger.

What's sleep?

Will be sleeping in another hour or two

Seldom get to sleep before 5

 

You have yet to show Scripture that provides any evidence for that belief. Provide Scripture--in its proper context--to back up your belief. Where is it? There is none.