The physical body of Jesus;

[Diggin in da Word]

Mary's egg was not instrumental in Christ's birth. Had it been, sin would have been passed to him through Mary.

I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Christ did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth.

He became sin for us, when He died on the cross at Calvary. But He had no sin nature. He was the perfect Lamb of God.

Read the account of Jesus birth.... I'll start it for you...

Now the birth of Jesus was on this wise. When Mary...

 

[Linda64]

Originally posted by Mercury:
Human beings are dust (Genesis 2:19, Job 4:17-19, 10:9, Psalm 104:29-30, Ecclesiastes 3:18-21, etc.), and Jesus was fully human. The incarnation was real. This does not take away from the fact that Jesus was also fully God. Matter is not inherently bad, since it was made by God, so there is no moral issue with God being made flesh.

Jesus Christ was no normal human being--He is the Word become flesh (John 1:14). He is the eternal God--He always existed as the Word. In order to become "flesh", He had to be born into the world as a human being--and Mary was the vessel God used to bring forth His only BEGOTTEN Son into the world.

I never said matter was evil--nor did I say that God becoming flesh was a moral issue. All I am saying is that Jesus Christ always existed as God --He is the Creator-- He became fully human but remained fully God. If Jesus was dust, as you say, then what happened when Jesus rose from the dead? Did He return to dust (Psalm 16:10)?

 

[Paul of Eugene]

Originally posted by Linda64:
I don't believe God used Mary's egg at all. Luke 1:30-35:

I lean in that direction but we'll never know for sure until we get to heaven and ask!

Jesus Christ was God's ONLY BEGOTTEN SON (John 3:16)

amen!

 

[Mercury]

Originally posted by Linda64:
If Jesus was dust, as you say, then what happened when Jesus rose from the dead? Did He return to dust (Psalm 16:10)?

No, Jesus' body did not return to dust -- he rose from the dead! However, at his birth his body was made of matter the same as our bodies. That's what I mean about his body being made of "dust" -- he dwelled in a body of dust the same way every human does, because he was fully human. That doesn't deny his preincarnate existence.

 

[IveyLeaguer]

Originally posted by Marcia:

Jesus is called the Son of Man because he took on human nature. Hebrews tells us that he could not pay for sins unless he became like his brothers. He is called the son of David.

How God did it, we can't know, but we do know from the Bible that Jesus was not just placed in Mary's womb. If that were the case, he would not be fully man and would not be related to man. Mary was his mother in the flesh.

Agree.

 

[russell55]

The Bible says Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit. If Mary's egg were used, Jesus would have been conceived of the Holy Spirit AND Mary

Ahhh....but it does say that Jesus was concieved of Mary:

Behold, the virgin shall conceive....

 

[IveyLeaguer]

also,

.. her seed .. shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Gen 3:15 (emphasis mine)

 

[Tom Butler]

Many,many years ago I came across a booklet written by M.R.DeHaan called The Chemistry of the Blood. I just googled it to refresh my memory. Dr. DeHaan, founder of the Radio Bible class, was also a physician. He held that the sin nature is transmitted through the blood. Dr. DeHaan held that the child's blood comes from the the father, that the mothers blood is not transferred to the child. She provides only the flesh, not the blood. Thus, the blood of Jesus came from the Father and not Mary, and is the only way Jesus could have been born without sin.

This view has been disputed as unsupported by either Scripture or biology. Opponents hold that God is spirit and has no blood. Jesus inherited his divine nature, his sinless nature, from the Father. But His body and blood were human. But Jesus was no less God because he was human, and no less human because he was God in the flesh.

Dr. DeHaan's contention has been weakened by subsequent discoveries in medical science, DNA, etc., but there are still those who defend him even to this day.

Tom B.

 

[Ransom]

Diggin in da word said:

Mary's egg was not instrumental in Christ's birth. Had it been, sin would have been passed to him through Mary.

Why should we accept that sin is passed through the genes?