The Word became Flesh and dwelt among us ( Jn 1:14)

[TCGreek]

You seem to contradict yourself. He was corruptible flesh, yet the perfect sacrifice.

1. There's no contradiction. Permit me to quote DHK here:

"There is no contradiction between these two statements.
He didn't come in sinful flesh but in the likeness of sinful flesh, meaning that he came without a sin nature. For flesh in and of itself is not sinful.
God did send His Son into the world in the same flesh as is common to all sinful men. Why? Because there is nothing sinful about the flesh itself. And if he had not done so, then Jesus would not have been human. Jesus was totally human and totally God at the same time."

2. The body of Jesus was perishable, even the animals used for sacrifices in the OT were perishable, but His nature was not like the rest of mankind and that is the line of demarcation.

 

[DHK]

You are disagreeing with the Bible Romans 8:3 which says Sinful Flesh !

Try again:
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:
--which refers to the sin nature; not to a conglomerate of chemicals which we are made up of.

 

[Eliyahu]

You guys are all desperate in the Impasse !


Don't Move !


You guys are contradicting the other guys each other, then betray your own posts!

1. Are you admitting that Jesus didn't come in the Sinful Flesh?


2. Are you admitting that Jesus came in the Sinless Flesh?

3. Do you admit that there is the Sinful Flesh according to the Bible Romans 8:3?

4. Are you admitting that Mary was a Sinner?

5. Was the Egg of Mary Sinless?

 

[Eliyahu]

Try again:
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:
--which refers to the sin nature; not to a conglomerate of chemicals which we are made up of.

So, are you claiming that any human beings carry Sinless Flesh as well?

 

[DHK]

Christ came in the flesh.
Omit the adjectives sinful and sinless, and it will be much easier to understand. He came in the flesh. It was necessary to do so for him to have a human nature.

 

[TCGreek]

Then you are contradicting TCGReek now.
Another question is whether the Egg of Mary was Sinless?




You are disagreeing with the Bible Romans 8:3 which says Sinful Flesh !

How much do you intend to grind the Egg of Mary? Until it becomes powder?

Eliyahu, you are missing the point here. Leave the physical make up of the egg alone, as DHK has adviced.

 

[Eliyahu]

How much do you intend to grind the Egg of Mary? Until it becomes powder?

Eliyahu, you are missing the point here. Leave the physical make up of the egg alone, as DHK has adviced.

Are you not honest or do you lack the inteligence to understand the contradiction and problems?

Didn't you claim that God sent His Son in the Sinful Flesh?

Please be honest in answering !

 

[DHK]

So, are you claiming that any human beings carry Sinless Flesh as well?

There is nothing inherently sinful about the cells of our body. It is moot to call them either sinful or sinless. They are neither. What is sinful is our nature inherited by Adam, and often called the Adamic nature. It means that we have a natural tendency to sin, however we are not forced to, we are the ones that still make the choice to sin.

 

[Eliyahu]

Christ came in the flesh.
Omit the adjectives sinful and sinless, and it will be much easier to understand. He came in the flesh. It was necessary to do so for him to have a human nature.

The problem with your theology is continuing !

Bible disagees with you in Romans 8:3 and Galatians 5:14-

All human fleshes are sinful except Jesus.

Read Galatians 5.

 

[Eliyahu]

There is nothing inherently sinful about the cells of our body. It is moot to call them either sinful or sinless. They are neither. What is sinful is our nature inherited by Adam, and often called the Adamic nature. It means that we have a natural tendency to sin, however we are not forced to, we are the ones that still make the choice to sin.

Then why does Romans 8:3 say Sinful Flesh?

 

[TCGreek]

Are you not honest or do you lack the inteligence to understand the contradiction and problems?

Didn't you claim that God sent His Son in the Sinful Flesh?

Please be honest in answering !

Let's keep the debate civil.

The Bible says that God sent His Son in sinful flesh (Rom 8:3). I didn't make it up.

But we must ask ourselves, What is the nature of this sinful flesh as it applies to Jesus?

Was the fleshly make of Jesus the same as ours (Col 2:9)?

 

[Eliyahu]

Let's keep the debate civil.

The Bible says that God sent His Son in sinful flesh (Rom 8:3). I didn't make it up.

So, you are disagreeing with DHK

But we must ask ourselves, What is the nature of this sinful flesh as it applies to Jesus?

No, Sir ! Jesus didn't have the Sinful Flesh, though His flesh was vulnerable to the sin, sin-sensitive and weak.

You don't know how to distinguish between Sinful and Sinsensitive.

Was the fleshly make of Jesus the same as ours (Col 2:9)?

There is a difference, though He was same in the weakness, but didn't have a sin. His Flesh was Sinless and our Flesh is Sinful. The common point is that both are weak.

Your theology encountered a serious contradiction.

You are saying Jesus came in the Sinful Flesh, then you said Jesus took the Sinless Flesh as the one of Adam before FALL. What happened to you?

 

[Eliyahu]

Can Nobody answer my questions?


You guys are contradicting the other guys each other, then betray your own posts!

1. Are you admitting that Jesus didn't come in the Sinful Flesh?


2. Are you admitting that Jesus came in the Sinless Flesh?

3. Do you admit that there is the Sinful Flesh according to the Bible Romans 8:3?

4. Are you admitting that Mary was a Sinner?

5. Was the Egg of Mary Sinless?


My answers:

1. Jesus didn't come in the Sinful Flesh

2. Jesus came in the Sinless Flesh

3. There is the Sinful Flesh according to Ro 8:3

4. Mary was a Sinner

5. The Egg of Mary was sinful.




Now it is your turn to answer the Questions.

 

[Eliyahu]

End of my posts today. It is already 24:10

 

[TCGreek]

So, you are disagreeing with DHK

1. I'm in no way contradicting DHK, for we are both make the same point but from a different angle.

No, Sir ! Jesus didn't have the Sinful Flesh, though His flesh was vulnerable to the sin, sin-sensitive and weak.

2. Neither do I believe He did. Read my posts carefully.

You don't know how to distinguish between Sinful and Sinsensitive.

3. Whatever that means.

There is a difference, though He was same in the weakness, but didn't have a sin. His Flesh was Sinless and our Flesh is Sinful. The common point is that both are weak.

4. You'll find no disagreement in me.

You are saying Jesus came in the Sinful Flesh, then you said Jesus took the Sinless Flesh as the one of Adam before FALL. What happened to you?

5. What happended to you? Then reread my posts.

 

[cowboymatt]

Eliyahu, I believe that God sent Jesus in the same sort of flesh as all of us have, which is what Rom 8.3 is saying. God did so because the popitiation had to be of a sacrifice that is like us. If Jesus had different flesh than us, then his sacrifice was void because he was different than us. But Rom 8.3 says that Jesus was like us, he was sent in "flesh of sin" (the literal translation from the Greek), which seems to mean flesh that has the propensity to sin, which we all can admit to being true. Jesus defeated this propensity in his flesh, which is why he could be our sin offering as Rom 8.3 states. By doing this for us, we have been saved and we too can begin to live like Jesus did: "not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit" (Rom 8.4).

Taking the one phrase "sinful flesh" out of its context in Rom 8.3 is what has lead you and many others to claim that Jesus' flesh was different from ours. But the text plainly states that his flesh was like our flesh, emphasizing the likeness not not-likeness!

So I can state that God sent Jesus in sinful flesh because that is exactly what Rom 8.3 says!

Anyone who argues that Jesus had a different flesh than every other human faces the impossible problems. Namely that if Jesus' flesh was different from our then his sacrifice was void, his example tainted, and his sharing in our sufferings a fraud.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Eliyahu, I believe that God sent Jesus in the same sort of flesh as all of us have, which is what Rom 8.3 is saying. God did so because the popitiation had to be of a sacrifice that is like us. If Jesus had different flesh than us, then his sacrifice was void because he was different than us. But Rom 8.3 says that Jesus was like us, he was sent in "flesh of sin" (the literal translation from the Greek),

I disagree. The lamb in the OT was not like us, yet God allowed that as a sacrifice.

Christ did not come in a flesh of sin. You need to get a new translation if yours is teaching you that junk.

 

[cowboymatt]

I disagree. The lamb in the OT was not like us, yet God allowed that as a sacrifice.

Christ did not come in a flesh of sin. You need to get a new translation if yours is teaching you that junk.

The sacrifices of the OT were mere types or foreshadows of Jesus' sacrifice.

I'm working from the Greek sfiC, what other text do you want me to go to?

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Christ could not have condemned sin had He taken on a flesh of sin, else He would have been condemning Himself.

 

[DHK]

Christ could not have condemned sin had He taken on a flesh of sin, else He would have been condemning Himself.

How are you going to prove that flesh is sinful.
I don't believe that my flesh is sinful.