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

Your really adding a lot to scripture, recreating the bible.

 

That's ironic coming from someone who had just implied that if Jesus shared Mary's DNA he must have had a sin nature:

Again, where in Scripture does it say this?

 

I know...it's hard to believe. :smilewinkgrin:

 

Most of us agree that life starts at conception. Because it does most are against such controversial methods of contraception such as “the morning after pill.” Why? It destroys life which has just begun, or at least the possibility of it. There is a small period of time between the fertilization of an egg, and the time that it becomes an embryo; just as there is a longer period of time between the time it becomes an embryo and a fetus (ca. 8 weeks).
Most conservative Protestants and Catholics are against abortion because they are against the taking of a life. Many consider it on par with murder. It is wrong.

Now, consider the reason why Christ came into the world:
Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

Matthew 8:17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.

Galatians 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

1 Peter 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

When we consider that Christ bore our griefs and carried our sorrows, we might do well to ask ourselves the question: how much of griefs and sorrows did he bear? Was it just from his ministry onward? Did he just empathize with us in our grief and sorrow from about age 30 to 33, or do the elderly and very young count as well? Did he bear their sorrows as well? Of course he did. If young, how young? Can infants bear pain before birth? Ask any doctor who works among those infants that are born to drug addicts and those born with fetal alcohol syndrome. Certainly they endure pain, even before they are born. Then ask the question, how far back in the pregnancy are they able to feel the pain. It is evident that there is life in the womb, and that that life starts right from the time of conception; from the time of the fertilized egg.

The traditional view of the virgin birth is that Christ was born of the virgin Mary conceived of the Holy Spirit, which naturally implies an egg being fertilized. No one thought otherwise until just recently. No one ever challenged that position.
Now some are saying that it can’t be that way.
Some say that Christ wasn’t conceived of the Holy Spirit, but rather He originated from an embryo. But that is not what the Bible says. Take that position to its logical conclusion. If that were true, then life before the embryo would not be sacred. And there would be no special reason to deny the morning after pill to those who wanted it. After all Christ was totally human, and his humanity didn’t start until after fertilization. Therefore humanity before the embryo isn’t sacred and can be done away with at a whim. Jesus did not bear the griefs and sorrows of those before that time.
SFIC at one point, said that Christ started his life at two months in the womb. If that be the case then abortions during the first two months of the first tri-semester must be alright. Life is not sacred during that time. Jesus was totally man and totally God at the same time; the God man. The time before his time in the womb, whatever that time was couldn’t have contributed to his humanity and therefore is not important and is not sacred. It doesn’t matter if it is aborted. I hope you see the logic of this.

Does God count all life as sacred or not? Did Christ bear all the grief and sorrow of mankind or not? And that would include life starting from conception. Humanity starts from conception. It starts when the egg is fertilized, before it even becomes an embryo. If the life of Christ did not begin then, then he wasn’t totally human and couldn’t totally relate to humans. He had a completely human nature in every way, and yet at the same time remained without sin. God the Holy Spirit is able to accomplish that feat. Do you believe that He can?
Something to think about.

 

As according to scripture. Everyone born from a human egg is born with the sin nature. Unless you are saying babies do have the sin nature.

 

His statement is in violation of scripture, and adds to scripture what isn't even hinted at. God does not violate they way He has said He does things. He does not change.

 

To be "conceived" of the Holy Spirit involves an ovum or egg. Conception cannot start with an embryo or with a fetus, both of which have been suggested here. To say that conception started there is to deny that Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit.

The eternal Word, the second person of the trinity.

 

In the natural conception has to start with an egg and an embryo. but you keep forgetting this was not a normal conception.

Just as a male was not used for the fertilization of an egg, the female was not used to produce an egg.

Christ's body was placed in Mary's womb. To deny that and say an egg was fertilized is to deny Scripture.

 

Is it hard to believe that the second Adam was created the same way as the first Adam and placed in the womb of Mary?
(I'm talking about the body of Christ. Not that Christ was created.)

The first Adam (his body) housed his own spirit.

The second Adam housed the spirit of God, thus He was sinless. He did not inherit the sin nature of Adam, which would have come through Mary had her egg been used.

 

Do you mean without the involvement of Mary. (She is human). Not a chance. That would be a denial of the virgin birth. To deny the virgin birth is almost equal to a denial of Christianity itself. It is that fundamental a doctrine.

It is not that different except for the added doctrines of the Immaculate Conception, the perpetual virginity of Mary, etc. The basic doctrine of the Virgin birth is almost the same.

No they don't.

That is the Apostle's Creed that the Catholic Church recites over and over again. I have it memorized both in English and in Latin. I was Catholic for 20 years. You can find it here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles'_Creed#Text_of_the_Creed

It wasn't fertilized with sperm, but by the Holy Spirit--miraculously.

Your assumptions and pre-conceived ideas about OT theophanies and Christophanies are red herrings which have nothing to do with this subject. They are irrelevant. Because God is able to appear to Abraham or Jacob has nothing to do with the Incarnation. They are apples and oranges. God at that time did not become totally human. Elijah and Moses did not become totally human when they met with Christ on the Mount of Transfiguration.

So who gets to decide how tiny is tiny. Why are you the authority (over God) that decides when the embryo arrived in Mary's womb. You also fit into this spaceship theory that God sent down from heaven a little embryo in his specially made spaceship and then plunked it into Mary's womb.
But the Bible teaches that a virgin shall conceive and bring forth a son. Conception involves the ovum or egg of the woman.

You are right in that he never was in the state of a sperm. He was virgin born. Virgins don't have sperm. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit. Spirits don't have sperm.
However her "egg" or ovum was still fertilized, and life began where life always begins. To say anything less takes away from the humanity of Jesus Christ. He was always God, yes. But he was totally man; and you imply that he wasn't. You give him a status less than that of a total man.

 

You are right; it was the virgin birth. But a birth nevertheless--a birth wherein Isaiah said: "a virgin shall conceive and bring forth a son." Conception involves an egg, and I do believe what the Bible says. I don't try to rationalize it away just because I may not understand it all. The Jehovah Witness says: "I don't believe in the trinity because I cannot understand it." They don't believe what they cannot understand. I find that same reasoning here.

With that statement:
1. You limit Mary's physical capabilities.
2. You limit God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
3. In effect you are saying that God is not powerful. Human reason must be put above the power of God, and the Word of God.

This spaceship theory of God plunking an a body into Mary's womb is not according to Scripture. The Bible says that Mary conceived and brought forth a son. Conception starts with an egg or ovum.

I would rather believe Scriptures like Isaiah 7:14 and Mat.1:20 which state explicitly state that Christ was born of a virgin conceived of the Holy Spirit; not carried by a spaceship somehow and then plunked into the womb at a later date.

 

Words have meanings. Conception takes place nine months before birth, when a man and woman come together. It only has one meaning, and that meaning is obvious, especially in the light that it did take place nine months before birth. What is the problem here?

So what if the Holy Spirit? That is like saying what if the Holy Spirit descended on Christ in a helicopter instead of a dove. The Lord uses natural means as much as possible, and we can't read into Scripture things that are not there. SFIC objects to me using the word "spaceship," and I object to you dreaming up all of these "what if's". Just believe the Bible instead.

Because I quote to you Isa.7:14 and Mat.1:20, and say that I believe these verses literally, this is the rebuttal I get??

The Word was manifest in the flesh and we beheld his glory. (John 1:14) That is what happened.
That fertilized egg grew into an embryo which developed into a fetus, which sometime later was born as an infant into a cruel and heartless world. Two years later a king tried to kill him. And 30 years later he was crucified for declaring the truth: that He was the Son of God, the Messiah, the Savior of mankind.