The Necessity of Special Creation

[Joe]

You are correct as is that article. There was no human intervention involved but there WAS a human involved. Mary. But she did nothing other than be willing to trust God.

The reason I consider that she needs Mary's egg has been stated before. It was to fulfill the prophecy that the Messiah would be of the lineage of David and would be Eve's "seed". I wasn't the one to set up the prophecies - God did and He followed through with them through Jesus.

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
Was it Mary's egg or Eve's?

To examine your sentence literally-

1.Eve's egg may have been fertilized in it's original state, unmarred, prior to the fall, with or without sperm. (Because hey, he's god)

2.Then the fertlizaton of the egg was implanted into Mary. -Invetro fertilization.
3. Then the "overshadowing" the Bible speaks of is Mary's conception. I think we all agree on conception took place.

This would leave Christ without the inherited sinful nature.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

When God Became Man by Dr Henry Morris

Thus the body of the second Adam must be formed directly by God and placed in a virgin's womb. This had been the very first promise made after the first Adam brought sin and death into the world. Speaking of "the woman, and . . . her seed," God said that He "shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise His heel" (Genesis 3:15). This prophecy was addressed to Satan, whose lie had elicited Eve's sin. This wonderful body would not grow from a man's seed, as in every other human birth, nor would it grow from a woman's egg, for in either case a sin-carrying and mutation-carrying embryo would necessarily result. It must instead be a seed specially formed by the Creator Himself, then planted in the virgin's womb, where it forthwith would become His "tabernacle" for thirty-three years as He lived on His planet Earth among those He had come to save.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

The Improbability of the Incarnation by Dr Henry Morris



But how can God actually become a man, "made of a woman" (Galatians 4:4), without inheriting the fallen, sinful, human nature common to all men and women including Mary? The answer can only be by special creation of His human body. ". . . for the Lord hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman shall compass a man" (Jeremiah 31:22). The word rendered "compass" in this verse precisely means "enclose" and nothing else than a virgin birth could be called "a new thing" in this context. Note also that it required creation!


Therefore, a mighty miracle of special creation was involved when God became man. "Wherefore when He cometh into the world, He saith, . . . a body hast thou prepared me" (Hebrews 10:5). As He had directly formed the body of the "the first man Adam," so also must He form the body of "the second man . . . the Lord from heaven" (I Corinthians 15:45, 47). "God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh" (Romans 8:3). All other components of human flesh were created there in that body—even the genes which would appear to be inherited from Abraham, David, and Mary. Remember that our Creator is "able of . . . stones to raise up children unto Abraham" (Luke 3:8). There was no inherent sin in His created human flesh, of course, but only the "likeness" of sinful flesh.

 

[Eliyahu]

Isaiah 7:14

הןה העלמה הרה וילדת בן וקראת שמו עמנו אל


Hine Ha-Alma Hara vaYoledet Ben vakarat shmo IMMANU-EL


הרה
( Harah) means simply " Pregnant" ( having child= perfect human Being). The Virgin ( Alma) will have a Baby, ( Neither Sperm Nor Egg nor Ovum).

The Virgin will have a perfect Human Being, A Baby, not the sperm( Zera)

 

[Eliyahu]

Galatians 4:4

εξαπεστειλεν ο Θεοσ τον Υιον αυτου, γενομενον εκ γυναικοσ, γενομενον υπο νομον

Gynomai means becomes, and the old English must be interpretted here again, and therefore we can translate as

God sent His Son, come out of Woman, come under Law.

If you believe it should be interpretted as " Made by Woman" then Was Jesus Made by Law as well?

Look there, you can find " Ginomai" used 2 times in one sentence,
Was Jesus made by Woman and by Law? ( Υοu may argue it should be Under Law but was He made really?)

Son of God made Woman and the Law, because the Law was the Word of God.

Ginomai was not translated as " Make" normally, it was mostly translated as " become" or "come in the form of"
This was used in John 1:14 as well, Word became Flesh.

If anyone claim this as the proof that Mary is the Biological Mother of Jesus, it is nonsense by the Greek Illiterate.

 

[Eliyahu]

If Mary were the Biological Mother of Jesus, Mary must be sinless before she was conceived, which means that Mary was Immaculate, and the Immaculate Conception can be justified, which cannot be true when we look at Romans 3, and Psalm 51, Jeremiah 17, Romans 5, Hebrews 9:22.

 

[Eliyahu]

The Improbability of the Incarnation by Dr Henry Morris

Therefore, a mighty miracle of special creation was involved when God became man. "Wherefore when He cometh into the world, He saith, . . . a body hast thou prepared me" (Hebrews 10:5). As He had directly formed the body of the "the first man Adam," so also must He form the body of "the second man . . . the Lord from heaven" (I Corinthians 15:45, 47). "God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh" (Romans 8:3). All other components of human flesh were created there in that body—even the genes which would appear to be inherited from Abraham, David, and Mary. Remember that our Creator is "able of . . . stones to raise up children unto Abraham" (Luke 3:8). There was no inherent sin in His created human flesh, of course, but only the "likeness" of sinful flesh.

It is a good quotation again.

I recommend everyone on this board to read this article

http://www.icr.org/article/477/


If any pastor ( not the average believer) doesn't know Henry Morris, I would rather conclude that he may be preaching Charles Darwin or Evolution theory.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

My KJV Defenders Bible Notes has the following concerning Genesis 3:15



3:15 her seed. The “seed of the woman” can only be an allusion to a future descendant of Eve who would have no human father. Biologically, a woman produces no seed, and except in this case Biblical usage always speaks only of the seed of men. This promised Seed would, therefore, have to be miraculously implanted in the womb. In this way, He would not inherit the sin nature which would disqualify every son of Adam from becoming a Savior from sin. This prophecy thus clearly anticipates the future virgin birth of Christ.

 

[DHK]

My KJV Defenders Bible Notes has the following concerning Genesis 3:15



3:15 her seed. The “seed of the woman” can only be an allusion to a future descendant of Eve who would have no human father. Biologically, a woman produces no seed, and except in this case Biblical usage always speaks only of the seed of men. This promised Seed would, therefore, have to be miraculously implanted in the womb. In this way, He would not inherit the sin nature which would disqualify every son of Adam from becoming a Savior from sin. This prophecy thus clearly anticipates the future virgin birth of Christ.

You have it right without understanding it. The word for seed in the NT is sperma, with its obvious interpretation. It is "miraculously implanted in the womb" and thus fertilizing the ovum, creating that "holy thing" that the angel was referring to you. "That (ovum) which was in Mary was conceived of the Holy Spirit."

Most people look upon the birth of the average baby as a miracle in itself, though it is an everday occurence. How much more is the miracle of the virgin birth of Christ.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

nowhere in the Word of God does it say the sperma fertilized Mary's ovum. That is man's understanding.

I have showed Scripture to prove Mary's ovum was not used at all. Dr Morris' articles also attest to this fact.

It was all God.

seed in John 7:42

Strong's Greek Dictionary
4690. sperma
Search for G4690 in KJVSL
sperma sperma sper'-mah
from 4687; something sown, i.e. seed (including the male "sperm"); by implication, offspring; specially, a remnant (figuratively, as if kept over for planting):--issue, seed.

See Greek 4687

the male's donation is not the only definition of seed. Why is that so hard to understand. But the only other definitions for seed as shown have to do with either plants (which does not fit), and pay attention... offspring. It does not refer to ovum at all.

Even in the NT, seed, when speaking of the birth of Christ is pointing to the fact that He was the offspring of Mary. She gave birth to Him; thus, He was her offspring. God did it all.

Look at Romans 8:3. 'God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh'. God did not send an embryo. He did not send a male's sperm cell. He sent His Son. An embryo is not flesh. A male's sperm cell is not flesh.


A fetus is flesh. God placed a fetus in Mary's womb. Her egg was not needed at all.

Hebrews 10 states: 'a body Thou has prepared me'. God put a body in Mary's womb, not a sperm cell.
There is the miracle. God did it all.

 

[DHK]

A fetus is flesh. God placed a fetus in Mary's womb. Her egg was not needed at all.

All that you demonstrate to me is your ignorance of biology.
At the end of the second month of the pregnancy the embryo is clearly recognizable as a human form, and thus at that time it is called a fetus. Accordingly you would say that Jesus was in the womb only seven months and not nine?

 

[standingfirminChrist]

The natural reproductive process was not used in the sending forth of God's Son, so natural biological laws cannot apply.

Can you show clearly from Scripture that Mary carried that which was in her womb for a full 9 months? I don't see it.

God's ways are mysterious. He chose to prepare a body for Jesus. He chose to place His Son in Mary's womb. The Bible says the Word became flesh, not the Word became and embryo and then flesh.

Yes, I believe it is highly possible Mary did not carry the Son for a full 9 months. We find the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit, and the announcement by the angel to Joseph not to fear to take Mary to wife. Joseph must have known Mary was pregnant. She must have been showing somewhat.

After the pronouncement of the placing of the Son in the womb, Mary went to Elisabeth's. Do we truly have a time frame of when she went? We do know Mary went to Elisabeth's and stayed for 3 months.

When was she found to be with child? What is the time frame?

Mary left Elisabeth's shortly before John's birth... possibly only a few days.
Are there Scriptures to indicate that Mary carried the child another 6 months after leaving Elisabeths?

 

[DHK]

The natural reproductive process was not used in the sending forth of God's Son, so natural biological laws cannot apply.

Again, an ignorance of biology. If that were true then Jesus wouldn't have even passed through the birth canal, would he? You are being totally ridiculous.

 

[annsni]

nowhere in the Word of God does it say the sperma fertilized Mary's ovum. That is man's understanding.

I have showed Scripture to prove Mary's ovum was not used at all. Dr Morris' articles also attest to this fact.

It was all God.

seed in John 7:42

Strong's Greek Dictionary
4690. sperma
Search for G4690 in KJVSL
sperma sperma sper'-mah
from 4687; something sown, i.e. seed (including the male "sperm"); by implication, offspring; specially, a remnant (figuratively, as if kept over for planting):--issue, seed.

See Greek 4687

the male's donation is not the only definition of seed. Why is that so hard to understand. But the only other definitions for seed as shown have to do with either plants (which does not fit), and pay attention... offspring. It does not refer to ovum at all.

Even in the NT, seed, when speaking of the birth of Christ is pointing to the fact that He was the offspring of Mary. She gave birth to Him; thus, He was her offspring. God did it all.

Look at Romans 8:3. 'God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh'. God did not send an embryo. He did not send a male's sperm cell. He sent His Son. An embryo is not flesh. A male's sperm cell is not flesh.


A fetus is flesh. God placed a fetus in Mary's womb. Her egg was not needed at all.

Hebrews 10 states: 'a body Thou has prepared me'. God put a body in Mary's womb, not a sperm cell.
There is the miracle. God did it all.

Just to make my life easier and for me to not type the same thing again, see post #80 http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1166682&postcount=80

If I bred a mare with a stallion via invitro fertilization and placed that embryo into another mare - and passed off that foal as being out of the surrogate mare, I'd be lying.

God told us that the Messiah would be of the line of David and Eve's seed and to say that because Jesus grew in Mary, He's of the line of David is denying the basic truths of lineage and making God a liar.

 

[DHK]

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.

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.

Here is the question for you SFIC
Do you believe the Bible when it says "for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost"?

There conception is spoken of, which of a necessity would involve the ovum and a miraculous intervention of the Holy Spirit.

Or, barring that what do you believe?
That Jesus was somehow inserted into the womb:
after day one?
after one week?
after one month?
after three months?
or after nine months, just one day before he was to be born?

What do you believe SFIC? Some of your ideas are so scary that one might infer that Christ came to earth in a spaceship without needing Mary at all!

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Again, an ignorance of biology. If that were true then Jesus wouldn't have even passed through the birth canal, would he? You are being totally ridiculous.

Not being ridiculous at all.

Just showing how much more of a miracle the birth of Christ was that so many fail to see.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Just to make my life easier and for me to not type the same thing again, see post #80 http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1166682&postcount=80

If I bred a mare with a stallion via invitro fertilization and placed that embryo into another mare - and passed off that foal as being out of the surrogate mare, I'd be lying.

God told us that the Messiah would be of the line of David and Eve's seed and to say that because Jesus grew in Mary, He's of the line of David is denying the basic truths of lineage and making God a liar.

Start looking at the birth in the supernatural instead of comparing His birth with that of a mare. God may reveal to you the totality of this miraculous event.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

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.

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.

Here is the question for you SFIC
Do you believe the Bible when it says "for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost"?

There conception is spoken of, which of a necessity would involve the ovum and a miraculous intervention of the Holy Spirit.

Or, barring that what do you believe?
That Jesus was somehow inserted into the womb:
after day one?
after one week?
after one month?
after three months?
or after nine months, just one day before he was to be born?

What do you believe SFIC? Some of your ideas are so scary that one might infer that Christ came to earth in a spaceship without needing Mary at all!

Using the natural mind, an ovum and a sperm cell would be needed for conception. But in the case of the birth of Christ we are not talking natural... but supernatural. You are trying to mix the natural and the supernatural.

 

[DHK]

Using the natural mind, an ovum and a sperm cell would be needed for conception. But in the case of the birth of Christ we are not talking natural... but supernatural. You are trying to mix the natural and the supernatural.

You are not answering my question, but avoiding it. Answer my question SFIC.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Scripture says 'a body Thou has prepared me,' not 'an ovum Thou hast prepared me.