He was COMPLETELY Man & COMPLETELY God
Nowhere in scripture does it say there was a conflict between these 2 Natures
He had One personality 2 natures.
Jesus PROVED that He walked Holy!
What scripture says He proved we could walk holy, because He walked Holy?
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Judy wrote:
> ... he wasn't of the same flesh as the rest of us.
> He was made in the "likeness" of man - not the same
> as..
You are going to have to make up your mind whether or not Jesus was a
human being. Jesus was either human, or he was an alien, angel, or god
who only looked like a human being. Which is it?
The Greek word translated "likeness" is "homoioma." Based on semantics
alone, it might mean that Jesus possessed a completely human form, or it
might mean that he only looked like a man but really was not one. We
must look to other passages and to the context of this passage to
determine which is meant.
If you look carefully at that Romans 8:3 and its context, you will see
that Jesus was truly flesh like the rest of us. In Romans 7, Paul just
finished explaining how the law was insufficient to bring us into
righteousness. Because of the power of our flesh, just knowing to do
right was not enough. Therefore, he concludes here in Romans 8 that it
took God sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for
sin, to condemn sin in the flesh. This is what gives us power to walk
in righteousness. Jesus proved to us, once for all, that we can live
holy BECAUSE he was of the seed of Adam, of the seed of Abraham, and of
the seed of David. This clearly is the meaning being conveyed. I don't
know how you can look at it any other way. Following is the passage:
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: That the righteousness of the law might be
fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
(Romans 8:3-4 KJV)
How does Christ condemn sin in the flesh if he did not become flesh?
This does not make any sense to me. If you have a way of explaining, I
would welcome hearing it.
The author of Hebrews likewise turns to the humanity of Jesus to
encourage us to resist sin, giving us power to rise above the flesh to
do what is holy and good.
Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy
that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is
set down at the right hand of the throne of God. For consider him that
endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be
wearied and faint in your minds. Ye have not yet resisted unto blood,
striving against sin. (Hebrews 12:2-4 KJV)
The clear implication here is that Jesus strove against sin and had to
resist the temptation to sin. Surely he experienced the same infirmity
of the flesh that we do, which is why he is able to help us and relate
to us when we likewise must resist sin.
Judy wrote:
> What made him different is that he didn't have the
> same inheritance in the first Adam as us.
Where does this idea come from? What Bible verse taught you this? Can
you even quote one? The Bible teaches us the opposite of this, that
Jesus had inheritance in Adam and was descended from him, being born of
the seed of Abraham and of the seed of David. As pertaining to the
flesh, Jesus was just as much a man as any of us. Jesus was a human
being.
I do not believe that we can truly understand the atonement and step
into holiness without understanding this humanity of Christ. Christ
became flesh and dwelt among us. He was truly one of us and showed us
how to live. Jesus Christ was our example in every way. If his flesh
was some alien flesh that was not descended from Abraham and David, then
he is not truly my brother, then he truly did not have the same
experiences that I have in the flesh, and he would be no hero for me
concerning my walk before God anymore than an angel would be.
Judy wrote:
> The egg does nothing at all until united with sperm
> which comes from the father and blood begins to flow
> in the 3rd week before the heart begins to beat.
> No blood flows in an egg incubating all by itself
> because there is no life....
The sperm only donates genetic material. The cells that develop into
blood come from the egg.
Judy wrote:
> and the placenta protects the child with no
> blood passing between it and the mother.
There is a placental barrier as you indicate, but it is not perfect.
Furthermore, the placenta comes from cells of both the embryo and the
mother.
Judy wrote:
> Normally there is no blood interaction between mother
> and child. and today the sex of an unborn child is
> determined by ultrasound. Being RH- myself and having
> had four children I know how uncertain all of this is.
Ultra-sound is the older technology. Genetic testing is more accurate
and more modern advances are showing that the mother's blood carries
enough blood cells from the unborn to determine the sex of the unborn.
I'm not making this up. I don't have time to look up some links for
you, but they are out there if you want to find them. If you truly do
not believe me, let me know and I will give you some medical references.
Peace be with you.
David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
