If Jesus was man and God how can Calvinist say we are born sinners when scripture does not ever say that.?If this were so Christ Him Self would be a sinner just like the rest of man
MB
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Did Jesus have Mary’s DNA?
- Thread starter canadyjd
- Start date
MB
My point is that man may be born in sin. Yet man is not a born sinner. The Bible never says so. Many here will tell you that when babies die they go straight to hell. This is because they lay Adams sin on them before they even take there first breath. Christ was born sinless this is true also new born babies are born sinless. Man has not inherited Adam's sin.Nor does scripture say we have.. In fact the Bible says we are not held accountable for someone else's sin.
The Bible also says Jesus would be born of a woman. To me that means Mary was related to Jesus
MB
I guess they can say that because of their theological views. Calvin's do not make a distinction between being conceived under the curse of sin and being a sinner. So (for a Calvinist) Jesus could not technically be human as we are - but human as pre-Fall Adam was.
For a dialog over what a Calvinist believes you'd do better asking a Calvinist. I do not believe in sin via biology.
But that is not what the Bible says in regards to the Incarnation. Scripture places Jesus as a human (as we are but without sin).
neither do i
MB
No one denies that Jesus is fully human, but without sin. What I am stating is that Jesus, as the 2nd Adam, comes into the world like the 1st Adam, without the curse of Adam upon him.
Do you both deny being born in iniquity?
Psalm 51:3-7 For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me. Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment. Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being, and you teach me wisdom in the secret heart. Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
I think the reason we do not see eye to eye here is related to the Fall.
If I understand you correctly (and please let me know if I do not- my intent is to let you know how I am taking your response and not to put words in your mouth) you seem to believe that when Adam sinned a change somehow occurred in his DNA
I do not believe that Adam's nature changed at all. Of course, this may depend on how we define "nature", but I think we would disagree if this were fleshed out.
I interpret Scripture as indicating that Adam was created and then (after Adam was created) God took Adam from the location where Adam existed and placed Adam in the Garden of Eden, where Adam existed in God's presence.
I believe that a few things occurred because of Adam's sin.
1. Adam's (and man's) eyes were opened to and Adam "became like God", to "know good and evil".
2. Adam would have to work the ground.
3. Because of Adam's sin, Adam would die ("for dust you are and to dust you will return").
As far as I can tell (from Scripture) these are the changes that affected Adam directly.
Other aspects applied to the Serpent and to Eve. And God Himself subjected Creation to futility (in hope).
Nothing in Scripture indicates an ontological difference between Adam and Jesus insofar as humanity or human nature is concerned. Nothing in Scripture indicates that we differ from the 1sr Adam as far as our nature's are concerned.
My conclusion is that if we, prior to being born of the Spirit, were taken into the Garden instead of Adam the result would be the same. I believe Jame's description of how sin manifests applies to Adam before the Fall (it is an eternal truth).
No. I can't speak for @MB , but I do believe we were all conceived and brought forth in iniquity. We were conceived and brought forth under the curse. And Jesus Humbled Himsekf to become one of us.
I do not believe sin is inherited, that people sin prior to sinning, or that sin is biological or a genetic issue.
Adam, because of the fall became a slave to sin. He was justified by faith (as all humans are). His offspring are all born in slavery to sin so that they must be justified by faith so as to have God's wrath abated against them.
Jesus was not born a slave to sin. His righteousness did not come from faith in the Promised One. He was born righteous. Not under the curse God placed on Adam and all his offspring.
May I ask this question:
Was every person born, from Cain onward, born in freedom and then later became a slave to sin, or have all who were born been a slave to sin at conception?
I believe we are conceived as a slave to sin. It is the curse of Adam that he failed to obey God, failed to protect Eve from the serpent and failed to crush the serpents head. God gave Adam a task in the garden and he failed.
Jesus, as the second Adam, succeeded where Adam failed.
I wonder how Jesus, coming from Mary, who by nature is a slave to sin, can not be under the curse of sin if part of his humanity is tied to the very nature of Mary in the curse. Is not the reason why Mary must be sinless in Roman Catholic theology the struggle with understanding how Jesus is not under the curse? I acknowledge that Mary was a sinner like us all. How then is Jesus born not under the curse?
I suspect both of us would acknowledge that God could create another Adam from the dust who would be fully human. The question that is unanswerable is whether God created a sperm from nothing and implanted it in Mary's egg or whether God created without need for Mary's egg, yet this human went through all that it means to be born into this world.
It is a mystery as to how God incarnated God as man. I can live with this paradox.
Yet, we are born in sin. Science shows children deceiving parents as early as age 6 months. That sin nature is ever present in all humans from the moment of conception.
I know, no Greek.
However I wonder why in the Greek of Galatians 4:4,5 there is no definite article relative to law?
As I said I know, no Greek.
Does it matter?
I do not believe Adam failed.
Before Adam was created the Son of God was going to be manifested ( as man, subject to death as of a Lamb, without blemish and without spot - sinless conceived of and brought forth of a virgin ) ..... WHY?
To destroy the works of the devil and the devil himself 1 John 3:8 HOW? Through the death Hebrews 2:14 What does through mean?
That is called redemption and it was foreordained before the foundation of the world. The very means of destroying the devil and his works. ---- I do not believe Adam failed.
for to vanity was the creation made subject -- not of its will, but because of Him (God) who did subject it -- in hope,
Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity. Ecc 1:2
It had been vanity from the time God rested on the seventh day from all he had created and made ----- In HOPE - Redemption. The redemption of the body R 8:23
God made man of flesh for purpose. What is man, A little lower than the angels. Why?
Humanity was enslaved by sin. But this is not biological. Adam's nature did not change. Scripture tells us that death came as a result of sin.
In other words, the idea that Adam was sinless before he sinned is true - but the idea his nature had to change is false (it is illogical ... you could say a gun is only a deadly weapon when fired, so a new gun becomes a weapon....that is what some do with Adam).
Christ did enter into the World under the consequences of sin (the curse) but was sinless.
I disagree that the "deception" here is sin. An infant is concerned with its own needs. But that is not sin.
Jesus, if He really was human, would have been concerned with His own needs at 6 months. That is human nature. He (Jesus) would have developed as a human child otherwise He would not have been human.
So we disagree on this part as well.
The difference is whether Christ saved from the inside (willingly coming under the bandage of sin and death) or from the outside.
Sure Adam failed. It's called...the Fall. "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."
This does not remove the fact that God planned for the fall and had a means of reconciliation.
Adam failed to protect Eve. He failed to accomplish the task God set before him.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
There are several on this board that are proficient in biblical Greek. John of Japan comes to mind. I suspect he would know.
peace to you
EXCEPT, Jesus did not come into the world as the 1st Adam. The 1st Adam was NOT born of a woman, but the 2nd Adam was born of HER SEED.
God could have made Jesus like Melchizedek, a mysterious person "without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life" (Hebrews 7:3), who walks into town like a hero in an old Western, which was actually a common expectation of the coming Messiah.
Frankly, that would have saved Jesus the credibility problems (Mark 6:3; Luke 4:22; John 8:30-42, 48) He faced throughout His ministry.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Usually, I think, the man provided the “seed” for the baby.
Regardless, “seed” means descendent. Jesus was born of Mary, He is her descendent.
peace to you