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

[DHK]

He did not have the sin nature that was passed to all mankind. He did not have the wicked and deceitful heart that mankind has because of sin. He did not come forth speaking lies.

SFIC,
What you imply is that because Christ did not have a sin nature Christ was somehow incomplete, deficient, not a total man. That would make him imperfect and unable to fulfill the prophecy as a lamb unspotted or without blemish, and unable to be a sacrifice for our sins. In your theology Christ is disqualified to be a sacrifice for sins because he is not complete; he is deficient. He is not the perfect man of God.

Not having a sin nature (the Biblically correct view), in no way takes away from his humanity. His full humanity can be seen in his sufferings on the cross. Despite all of its detractions the play "The Passion" brought out in a vivid way the sufferings of Christ, as a man. He didn't have a sin nature; was perfect man, tempted in all poiints such as we are. If he had a sin nature then he wasn't God for God is not a sinner. He was perfect God and perfect man at one and the same time and remains so to this day.

 

[DHK]

A baby inherits from it's mother through that egg, same as it would have Jesus, He would have inherited the sin nature, same as we all do.

This is false. The sin nature is inherited through the male not the female.

Adam wasn't concieved, was he fully man, fully human? No, God created his human flesh, same as He did Jesus.

Wrong again.
It is true that Adam and Eve was created. But Adam fell. When Adam fell God cursed him, the woman, the earth, Satan, etc. Upon Adam fell the Adamic curse or Adamic nature which is passed through the man from generation to generation. This has nothing to do with the woman. It comes from the man. To suggest that Christ is a created being is heresy. Christ is God and never was created. He came to earth via Mary. He was God manifest in the flesh. His flesh came from Mary. The Bible distinctly says that he was born of Mary conceived of the Holy Spirit. How much plainer can Scripture get?

What makes no sense is to say Jesus had Mary's dna, inherited the sin nature from her, when we know this is not true in the least.

True. For the sin nature is never inherited through the woman.

 

[Eliyahu]

Not in a blood lineage. Remember that there were SERIOUS issues with blood lines in the Scripture. God made promises through the blood lines - and not just for anyone in the household but to specific people and their own offspring.

You are denying the fact which even the unbelievers accept.

Joseph was accepted as the Father of Jesus. Nobody argued it at that time.

So, you believe that the Blood of Jesus shed at the Cross was inherited from Mary, don't you?

 

[Eliyahu]

Is this Blood shed at the Cross inherited from Mary?

Does it contain the DNA of Mary?:

1Pe 1:19 - Show Context But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: ( crosswalk.com)

 

[DHK]

You are denying the fact which even the unbelievers accept.

Joseph was accepted as the Father of Jesus. Nobody argued it at that time.

So, you believe that the Blood of Jesus shed at the Cross was inherited from Mary, don't you?

You sound like an unbeliever denying the humanity of Christ. Christ was wholly God and wholly man at the same time. Can you accept that as a Biblical fact? Do you believe in the virgin birth of Christ?

 

[Eliyahu]

Sorry - Was out all day so now I'm going through the ton of posts since I left.

No - I'm pointing out that this is a new heresy. No one in history has believed this. If it takes "science" to come up with a new idea about Jesus - a "new insight", then something is wrong. This "science" is saying that Scripture is a lie.

It is a new understanding from me and even myself didn't connect this issue with Incarnation before though I have maintained the belief of Surrogate Motherhood of Mary based on Matthew 1:20 and Heb 1:5, and Col 1:14-20.

I'm saying that God used the egg from Mary to create the Messiah. I don't think that's where all His human flesh came from since it takes 2 sets of DNA to make an egg fertilized and become a baby.

A geneology is useless if it is not blood passed through the line. You're seriously ignorant when it comes to blood lines. You cannot claim to be of the blood line of someone when you are not physically a part of that family. If God created Jesus apart from Mary, without connection to a human, then He is not human. He might be LIKE a human but He would not be human. The seed of Eve would bear the Messiah - that is in Genesis 3:15. The "seed" represents offspring as it does all through the Scriptures - not ONCE does it mean an adopted child. THAT is the proof.

Did Mary have a blemish, sinless Blood?

If Jesus had DNA of Mary and His Blood was sinless, Mary may have been Immaculate as RCC claims.

Do you believe that?

 

[D28guy]

DHK,

"The sin nature is inherited through the male not the female."

" For the sin nature is never inherited through the woman."

Huh? I've never heard anything like that before. Are you saying that men are sinners, but women arent? Are you saying that men contribute DNA to the baby but women dont?

If they both contribute DNA then they both pass along the sin nature to the baby, I would think.

Mike

 

[DHK]

Did Mary have a blemish, sinless Blood?

Does she need to? What is the relevance of that question seeing that:
1. The sin nature is passed via the seed of the man.
2. Christ was conceived of the Holy Spirit, bypassing the seed of the man from whom the sin nature is inherited.
3. Unless you are implying that the Holy Spirit is a sinner there is no way that Christ inherited a sin nature and thus the Immaculate Conception is a needless doctrine, and a sinless Mary likewise a needless doctrine and contrary to Scripture.

If Jesus had DNA of Mary and His Blood was sinless, Mary may have been Immaculate as RCC claims.

We need to be silent where Scripture is silent and accept what the Bible says by faith. That is the best policy. If Mary had to be sinless then so did her mother, grandmother, great grandmother, and all the way back to Adam. It is a false doctrine that makes no logical sense. God used Mary is a special way. Is there something wrong if he chose to use the womb of Mary to bring forth the humanity of Christ? Moses saw God face to face as it were. Are we so wrapped up in so-called scientific facts that we no longer believe in the miraculous? God forbid!

 

[DHK]

DHK,
Huh? I've never heard anything like that before. Are you saying that men are sinners, but women arent? Are you saying that men contribute DNA to the baby but women dont?

If they both contribute DNA then they both pass along the sin nature to the baby, I would think.

Mike

"All have sinned and come short of the glory of God."
There is no one that has escaped having the sin nature, and being under the condemnation of sin. But how do we inherit the sin nature?

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

What is the meaning of this verse?
By one man sin entered into this world--Adam.
By Adam death passed upon all men. It is through Adam that the death passes, that the sin nature is passed.

Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
--For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners.
The sin nature comes through the man (Adam)

Both parents contribute DNA. That simply determines genetics, genetic traits in specific. It has nothing to do with the sin nature. God put that in order at the fall.

 

[Eliyahu]

You sound like an unbeliever denying the humanity of Christ. Christ was wholly God and wholly man at the same time. Can you accept that as a Biblical fact? Do you believe in the virgin birth of Christ?

DHK,

Let's start with the simplest principle first.

Jesus Christ is both God and human.

Can He not be Human if He didn't take anything from Mary?

I mentioned The Pre-Incarnate Jesus wrestled with Jacob ( Genesis 32:28-32) and He declared " I am God" (Genesis 31:13-15). Jehovah God appeared to Abraham and got His feet washed, ate the food, meat and cheese, Under His feet Israel ate the food ( Ex 24:10-11),
If God the Holy Spirit create a body for Jesus and Jesus take another body which is exactly the same as the First Adam, then He is not God-Man?


Let's say if God created the second Adam exactly the same as the First Adam, then the Second Adam is not Adam ( Human being)?

Jesus came in the form of the Second Adam in order to rescue the First Adam. The Blood shed at the Cross was Sinnless and Blemish, while Mary was a sinner by born, and her blood was inherited from sinful parents even though she was redeemed by the Blood of Jesus. When she was redeemed, Jesus didn't shed the Blood yet, and therefore she just received the Promisory Note, not the Cash for the Redemption. All the OT believers were like that. We the NT believers were redeemed by the Prepaid Cash at the Cross.

You are quite obssessed with the idea that the Human Nature should come from the Adam's race but you have to look at the other factors too. Word became Flesh.
If any part of body of Mary became Flesh of Jesus, John were wrong.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

By one man's disobedience...

Who disobeyed first? Did not Eve know the command to not eat of the tree? First Eve ate of the tree and the she gave to Adam.

The Word says the two were one flesh. When Paul wrote 'By one man's disobedience,' I believe he was speaking of the fact that both disobeyed.

Remember, they tried to pass the blame? Both disobeyed, but Eve disobeyed first.

 

[Eliyahu]

Why nobody has answered this question?


Was the Blood shed at the Cross inherited from Mary?



Heb 9:14 - Show Context How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
1Pe 1:19 - Show Context But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

 

[standingfirminChrist]

If it had been inherited from Mary, Christ would not have been sinless.

 

[Eliyahu]

True. For the sin nature is never inherited through the woman.

The Paramount of your theology is found here.

In your logic, Men mostly marry in the Autumn and Women marry mostly in the Spring, right?

Men commit the Adultery, but Women never commit Adultery, right?

The above is your logic and belief, I guess.

 

[annsni]

You are quite obssessed with the idea that the Human Nature should come from the Adam's race but you have to look at the other factors too. Word became Flesh.
If any part of body of Mary became Flesh of Jesus, John were wrong.

And you are quite obsessed with this idea that if the flesh of Jesus was created with anything from Mary, then the Word cannot become flesh. Who was the Word? Was He a tiny embryo? Or was He a little baby yet to be born? No. The Word is the eternally existing Son of God. The FLESH was created through a miracle of God using Mary's egg so that the prophecies could be fulfilled that the Messiah would come through the blood line of David, Abraham and Adam/Eve. Yes, Jesus could have come into the world through any means He wanted - but He chose the humble birth that occurred - to be born of the "seed" of a woman.

You can argue all you want but understand that you are not arguing with those of us here but with the Word of God. As I stated before, that's a scary place to be. There are 2 people that I've seen who have this belief - you and SFIC. 2 people does not a doctrine make - especially when it contradicts the Word of God.

If Jesus had not been born of the seed of a woman, then He would not have been able to fulfill the prophecies that were set down by God Himself.

You ask if the blood of Jesus on the cross was inherited from Mary? It was physical blood with human properties. It had a blood type, it had DNA - and that DNA was fully human - carrying the DNA from His forefathers - David, Abraham and Adam, and yes, Mary.

 

[Joe]

"All have sinned and come short of the glory of God."
There is no one that has escaped having the sin nature, and being under the condemnation of sin. But how do we inherit the sin nature?

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

What is the meaning of this verse?
By one man sin entered into this world--Adam.
By Adam death passed upon all men. It is through Adam that the death passes, that the sin nature is passed.

Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
--For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners.
The sin nature comes through the man (Adam)

Both parents contribute DNA. That simply determines genetics, genetic traits in specific. It has nothing to do with the sin nature. God put that in order at the fall.

I bolded a portion of your post. I understand how you came to that conclusion, the word is clear. Except it makes no sense to me.
So only Adam's sin nature was contageous, though both Adam and Eve carry this sin nature "virus" so to speak. Since Eve ate the apple first, thus acquiring a sin nature first, (likely seconds prior to Adam), she isn't the one who actually brought sin into the world? It's the second human who ate the apple (Adam)?
That doesnt sit right.....
I suppose we'll find out the truth on the other side

Edited to add: Sorry SFIC, I take a while to type posts and didn't realize I was duplicating your words.

 

[Eliyahu]

"
Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

What is the meaning of this verse?
By one man sin entered into this world--Adam.
By Adam death passed upon all men. It is through Adam that the death passes, that the sin nature is passed.

Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
--For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners.
The sin nature comes through the man (Adam)

Both parents contribute DNA. That simply determines genetics, genetic traits in specific. It has nothing to do with the sin nature. God put that in order at the fall.

So, when Eve was tempted first to eat the Fruit, if Adam didn't eat the Fruit, the Sin couldn't enter the world?

Until Adam ate the Fruit after Eve ate the Fruit, was Eve Sinless?
Didn't she commit the sin already?

 

[Joe]

So, when Eve was tempted first to eat the Fruit, if Adam didn't eat the Fruit, the Sin couldn't enter the world?

Until Adam ate the Fruit after Eve ate the Fruit, was Eve Sinless?

Yeah, that's what I was wondering. Was she sinless in those few seconds before he chomped down. I don't think so from what he says. She inherited the sin nature the minute she took a bite but it couldnt be passed on.

 

[Eliyahu]

1 Tim 2:

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.


What does the Romans 5:12, 19 say?

Anthropou means all human, the English word man is just a representation of the human beings, Adam's race.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Ann, look up the Hebrew for 'her seed' in Genesis 3:15. It means 'child' or 'posterity'. It does not mean egg. You cannot twist the Scripture to say Mary's egg was the seed. The seed was Christ Himself. Not of Mary, but of God.