Was Mary a surrogate or did she contribute her seed to Jesus??

Eve was of no woman's seed, so the comparison to Jesus appears right on as he was also of no woman's seed but had a human incubator.
Or it was the fact that Eve, before the fall, had no sinful nature. So her seed before the fall could have been used to conceive Jesus with Mary as a human incubator. I have to go back to work for a few hours now.

 

Sorry, but that seems like something out of science fiction.

To me this seems to be twisting of Scripture to get Mary completely out of the picture. While I don't believe that she should hold some exalted place like the RCC does, we can't just write her out of the Bible iether.

Jesus was 100% God and 100% man - and it makes perfect sense that to be 100% man he would have a human mother, not a human oven.

 

The first Messianic Promise:
Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Galatians 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
--Paul also refers to the uniqueness of the virgin birth.

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.

Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Luke 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.

Luke 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Luke 1:38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

Luke 1:47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

Luke 2:7 And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

Above are most of the Scripture dealing with the virgin birth of Christ. Let's lay down some foundational principles:
Jesus is God. He is deity. At no time did he ever relinquish being God. He always was and is, and always will be God. There was not a second in his life where he was not God, the second person of the triune Godhead.

When Jesus came to this earth he came as fully man and fully God. He was the God-man.

Since we have many Scriptures that use phrases such as "seed of a woman," "made of a woman," "conceived," we cannot ignore the fact that in some way Jesus was born of a virgin and the flesh of that virgin was involved.

What we do know is that the flesh of a man was not involved. This is important because it is through the man that the sin nature is inherited. Thus Jesus escaped inheriting the sin nature, and thus was still wholly man and completely God at the same time.

To get a better understanding of what happened at the birth of Christ it would be well to compare his birth to his death. Let's ask some of the rhetorical questions that Bob has put forth in the context of the death of Christ.
Did Jesus go to the cross as a man or as God? We might answer both because his natures cannot be separated.
Yet when Peter tried to interfere and stop him, he took his sword and cut off the ear of Malchus, the servant of the high priest. Jesus restored the ear (an exercise of his divinity), and rebuking Peter said: "Know ye not that I could have called 12 legions of angels..." In other words Jesus didn't have to go to the cross. He went willingly. It was a wilfull act of his human nature that caused him to go. He made a choice using his human mind not to call the angels of heaven to rescue him.

What does that tell us? While not forsaking his deity, he laid aside his divine attributes (his omnipotence to call those angels) and suffered as a man, just as those thieves would suffer.

Did Pilate become the instructor and rebuker of God?
Did the Jews and Romans become the revilers of God?
Did Pilate become the counsellor of God?
Did the servant of the high priest become a rebuker of God, and persecuter of God, slapping God in the face!
Can God be slapped in the face?

We can come up with all sorts of such rhetorical questions when we consder Christ going to the cross and suffering as a man, yet at the same time suffering as God, when God the Father turned his back on God the Son as He bore the sins of the world. At that moment in time both natures were involved.

In the same way, throughout his birth and childhood Christ was God, even in the womb. But as God he chose to lay aside his divine attributes. That doesn't mean he wasn't any less God. He chose not to exercise those divine attributes that he may suffer and live as man suffered and lived--just as he chose not to call 12 legions to rescue him from the cross. It was his decision to do so; it was the will of his father. He always submitted throughout those 30 years to submit to his Father. Yet he was still God. Nothing could ever take away his deity.

He was born of a virgin. His flesh came from a virgin. His deity always remained intact. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit. That is why the "seed" of the woman is referred to--the conception is by the Holy Spirit. Paul uses the phrase "made" of a woman. The birth was unique, like none other. It produced one who was wholly God and wholly man at the same time. It could be no other way.

Was Jesus born of Mary. Of course He was. But his divine nature existed far beyond that. His fleshly nature came through Mary, a rightful heir of the throne of David.
BTW, Joseph, though of the lineage of David, his lineage had been cursed. If Christ had been born of Joseph, he would have been born of line whose children would inherit a curse forever disallowing them to inherit the throne of David. The virgin birth was the only way for Christ to escape that curse. Nevertheless both lineages had to be shown for appearance sake. For Matthew is a gospel written to the Jews presenting Christ as the Messiah, the King of the Jews. Fulfilling OT prophecy, he demonstrates that Christ was born of a virgin. It could be no other way.

 

Hence my allegation of docetism earlier.

BTW, DHK, some good meaty stuff on your post!:thumbs:

 

I would disagree with this statement. Jesus' human nature did not want to go to the cross. "Father, if it be Thy will, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless not my will, but Thine be done."

Christ, in His humanity relied totally on God and His will. Even during His ministry, Christ said that He came to do the will of the Father.

The flesh wars against the Spirit constantly. I believe it was the Spirit that caused Christ to take that walk of shame, not the flesh.

 

The Spirit doesn't force the flesh to do anything. The mind must willingly submit to the Spirit. As it was Christ's decision to do so, it must be my decision also. That is what the Bible teaches:

Romans 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

The mind is very active in serving God; in submitting itself to the Spirit of God; it was this way also in the life of our Lord.

Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.

 

Amen DHK!!! Very well put!!!!!

 

I know you make all the time good reasoning.

Then, if the half of the human flesh contributed to the formation of body of Jesus, then could we still say " Word became Flesh" ?

Word of God became Flesh is the fundamental Truth of Christianity.

These days, stem cell research tells us the possiblity of the creation of a human embryo without Sperm, only with the Ovum. This may be done between Ovum and the skin cell.
This is not Word became Flesh.

Jesus was the Word of God, and the Word became Flesh. In human eyes, Something was evolved from Nothing!

Think about this issue with a view to " Word became Flesh"

 

Correct!

On this issue, if anything of Mary became a part of Jesus, Bible couldn't say " Word became Flesh"


RCC claim that the Blood shed at the Cross was inherited from Mary, but in that case, the Blood of Mary was not sinless though RCC claims Immaculate Conception.

I am sure, Word became Flesh, and it means that Flesh came out of No material.

 

We must start from the fundamental Truth.

YOu cannot change what actually happened to Jesus 2000 years ago. It actually happened that Word became Flesh.
If any seed of Mary became Flesh, it means Flesh became Flesh.

When we read the OT, it gave the impression that the descendant of David actually become the Messiah, and moreover, actually the Jews believed Jesus was the son of Joseph. I believe Most people believed Jesus was the Son of Joseph until His death at the Cross. Indeed, paternally Joseph was accepted as His Father. Then even if Mary was only Surrogate Mother, she would have been believed as Mother of Jesus.
So, that cannot be a problem at all.

Read 1 Cor 15.

Jesus didn't belong to Adam's race.

45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. 46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. 48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.

Was Mary born out of the First Adam or the Last Adam?

 

Let's not forget that He walked on water before His Resurrection. Let's not forget that He touched blinded eyes and healed them before His Resurrection. Let's not forget that He did many things that I've yet to see a human do.

He was in flesh... but He was the Son of God.

Do you not believe that God could impregnate Mary without even the egg? BTW, the egg is not the seed either. The seed is provided only by the male.

Mary only carried the Son of God. "unto us a Son is given".

Had Mary provided the egg, then Christ would have been born a sinner. Mary came from Adam's race. Had she provided the egg, Jesus would have been born a sinner and not worthy to go to the cross for our sins.

 

It wouldn't be the first time God created human flesh.
If Jesus carried Mary's blood, then He inherited the sin nature.

 

exactly......

 

Romans 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

Yes, the Word became flesh, but He did not become sinful flesh. Only in the likeness of sinful flesh. Had Mary provided the egg, He would have been in sinful flesh.

Thank God He was not.

 

Donna, you and StandingFirm have just made a strong case for the immaculate conception of Mary.

 

No, I think not. You misread my posts, and standingfirminchrist's.

 

He sure did.

Zenas, read our posts again. And read them carefully.

Immaculate conception is the teaching that not only was Jesus born of Mary through Divine Grace, but that Mary had to be completely free from sin in order for that miraculous birth to take place.

Neither of us even came close to implying such nonsense.

Mary was a sinner just as you and I in need of a Savior.

 

Fundamental truth is found in the Word of God.
The virgin birth is a foundational doctrine of Chrtistianity, just as important as the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.
What does the Bible say about His birth:

It talks about the "seed of a woman" (Genesis 3:15)
It speaks of Christ being "made of a woman" (Gal.4:4)
It was prophesied by Isa. that a virgin would conceive (Isa.7:14)
That reference has been referred to many times in the NT.
The angel reassured Mary that the Holy Spirit would come upon her and she would conceive through the Holy Spirit.

Furthermore Mary herself rejoices in God her Savior indicating that she herself is in need of Savior, futher admitting that she is a sinner; for only sinners need a Saviour.

Christ is deity, and always was. He was born of a virgin, but his deity never changed. He was not born of Joseph through which the sin nature comes. He was born of the "seed" of Mary (Gen.3:15)--a miraculous event, conceived of the Holy Spirit. Thus He did not have a sin nature, though his human nature did come from Mary. It is the only way that he could inherit a human nature and come into this world as man, suffer as man, live as man, and finally die as man--and yet all this time remain as God.

These are fundamental truths.

You are confusing deity with humanity. John presents Christ as deity. Luke presents Christ as the Son of Man. The emphasis on every Gospel is different, and the prupose of every gospel is different. To take one verse out one gospel without comparing it to others is taking Scripture out of context--something indicative of a cult (though I am not accusing of that). God came into this world--that is true. But that is only true because the two natures cannot be separated. Mary gave birth to Jesus, his humanity. Jesus never ceased to be God, but many times he laid aside his divine attributes (as he did during his birth (and the nine months before that). He laid aside his divine attributes when he went to the cross willingly of his own accord. He didn't have to. He didn't have to go to the cross. The Bible says that he could have called 12 legions of angels to defend himself but he didn't. He went to the cross anyway to die for you and me.

What is your point here? Mary gave birth to Jesus. The Bible says he did. Read Luke 2.

There were three classes of people:
1. Those that were totally ignorant of the birth of Christ, and accused Christ of being born of fornication--not even recognizing Joseph as a father.
2. Those that unwittingly and naively accepted (but wrongly) that Joseph was his father.
Neither of these groups knew much of the birth of Christ, and wrongly assumed that he was from Galilee or from Nazareth.

John 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

John 7:41 Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee?

Very few took the time to look into the facts: Where did Christ really come from.
1. He was born in Bethlehem of Ephratha.
2. He was born of Mary, conceived of the Holy Spirit.
3. Most important of all, He came from Heaven. (John 3:13)

Read about Joseph's genealogy:
[FONT=&quot] Jer. 22:24-30 shows that the curse of Jechoniah demanded the virgin birth.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]a. The Lord's promise to David (2 Sam.7:16): Thine house and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee: thy throne shall be established forever."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]b. Several generations later Jehoiachin (Coniah) was cursed (Jer.22:30): Thus saith the Lord write this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days; for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting on the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]c. The physical link was cursed by God.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]d. Joseph, the legal father of Jesus, was of this cursed line.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]e. The solution: Mary was a descendant of Nathan, another son of David (Lk.3:31).[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]f. There was no other way that the Lord Jesus could have escaped the curse. The fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy of the virgin birth is the only way the Lord could be true to His promise to David and His curse on Jehoiachin.[/FONT]

Jesus was born of a virgin. His flesh came from Mary. His sin nature did not. All throughout He remained God. He never relinquished his deity, though he set aside his divine attributes for a temporary period of time.