Jesus sex chromosomes

(Lindsay Brandt) #21

@cer7, I agree that taking on human form doesn’t relinquish Jesus’ status as a person of the Trinity. However, even though Jesus was already in existence as the Word, he still had to be born of a human vessel. He didn’t preexist as Jesus but as the Word. But to be representative of the fallen humanity, he had to be part of them, meaning he couldn’t just be a preformed human God put in Mary’s womb without an material from Mary at all. Hebrews 2:14-18 says that “in all things He had to be made like His brethren” in order to be a proper representative for them. I’m not exactly sure this would apply if he wasn’t borne of both God and man in the way of having the natural material along with having the supernatural element.

I don’t see this as detrimental to the faith, by the way. I am just enjoying wrestling with the subject to see if I can get better clarification :slight_smile: I don’t think there is a very clear answer, though, the more we go into it, and in that case, it really doesn’t matter, because either way, Jesus is both God and man and still serves as our High Priest and Savior. I’m glad we wrestled with this, though, so that I could see that what I understood and assumed before isn’t quite as clear as I originally thought.

(C Rhodes) #22

@psalm151ls. I would agree with you until you use terms like ‘had’. That’s not a limit I can place on the nature of GOD. I think many things happen as they do and did because that’s the only way we can relate. So, even the manner in which JESUS acquired human form has more to do with our ability to comprehend and relate than GOD’s ability. For me there are no absolutes for GOD, just tender kindness for us in our fragile existence. But it has been refreshing to drag my own thought processes out into the light of shared consideration.:slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like
(Lindsay Brandt) #23

@cer7, when I say “had,” I am not talking about a limit placed on God or His nature by us or our understanding, but by the limits He Himself set, such as the fact that Creator is different and separate than creature in both substance and existence. Seeing God as setting limits Himself in how He works out His plan (only as has been revealed in His Word) is different than our setting limits on Him. He sets a framework and works within the limits He Himself has set for that framework. Since the Creator Godhead, all Trinitarian persons included, is completely distinct from the creation, it was, indeed, necessary for Jesus to take on human form and to be made like “his brethren” in all things. Hebrews itself says “He had to be,” and uses the term “had.”

(C Rhodes) #24

@psalm151ls. Slight correction. In Hebrew 2:14-18 your translation may say had, mine does not. KJV. I don’t disagree that much of how GOD moves and communicates is for our benefit. I do still hold that GOD does not limit Himself, we are comfortable within limits. But following on to know more of Him, will constantly expand the boundaries of our understanding. It is why GOD’s scripture is a living text.

I have read scripture that defined and aided my life in one instance, only to find days and years later that same scripture defining and aiding my current situation in a different way. Never preempting the first defining moment.

Is how much of what we know about GOD deadlocked in our definitions? Halted in our comfort? The Word of GOD is a viable, lively, and breathing text. Meeting us to comfort and grow us through the many events of our lives here. How much we can know of GOD is only limited by our willingness to follow on to know Him.

GOD has placed no limits on Himself. Just upon us because of our frailty. And sometimes our stubbornness. But it is okay if we leave this conversation agreeing to disagree. It takes nothing away from our mutual love of GOD.

1 Like
(Lindsay Brandt) #25

Of course it’s fine to leave the conversation agreeing to disagree. However, I find it beneficial, and who knows who else out there might. I couldn’t get conversations like this in my university online platforms. People were timid about the challenge involved.

Making a claim that God has placed no limits on Himself is actually contradicted in His character. While we cannot ground that claim that God has placed no limits on Himself in anything, we can, indeed, ground the claim that He has put limits on Himself because of what we know about His character. While the first makes a claim about which it can know nothing, the second makes a claim taking into consideration what has been written in Scripture. One of the things God “can’t” do is allow unholy people in His holy presence. God “cannot” contradict Himself, even if, in our limited understanding, we think we see that He does in some situations or even in Scripture.

But as for the “correction,” the Hebrew in Hebrews 2:17 is “opheilo” and the meaning of that word actually supports the NKJV. The KJV is just a translation, an earlier one that was not as far along in its understanding of the original language. So “correction” is too strong of a word when we are both using mere translations. When one looks up the Hebrew Word, it speaks of obligation.

I think sometimes, because of the misunderstanding of and attitude towards God’s sovereignty (which I believe is being addressed in Lennox’s book in the book discussion category, Determined to Believe), the claim that He does not set limits on Himself seems justified, but like I said, it is based on a misunderstanding, because it does not take into account His character.

That being said, I think I’ll leave it here simply because I think we have strayed off topic from the original question…a good rabbit trail…but nonetheless a rabbit trail, and I will post the thread that addresses this issue and others’ conversation about it right here:

C Rhodes, if you have any last words, I will read them, though :slight_smile:. I don’t need the last word :slight_smile:. And I’ll give the “heart signal” when I’ve read it, ha.

(chris john) #26

I believe that in the jewish culture the son in law is adopted as a son, so you may be right that tho Heli was Mary’s father Joseph name is inserted, thanks for sharing.

1 Like
(Sieglinde) #27

—“In my view all these ideas are fascinating to think about, but I wonder if it’s at the cost of missing the forest for the trees. How wonderful that from creation God had a plan for my salvation. How incredible that the creator of the universe walked in sandals in the very dust from which man and woman were created. How blessed women are that we were the means of bringing the divine into the world.
Thank you, that is Beautiful :heart:

(chris john) #28

Thank you Jennifer Judson I agree with you I do not doubt Jesus was fully man and that’s because the bible said so, as I learn more of the bible I come to see it cannot be doubted as God’s inerrant word,though the bible is not a scientific text it has made many scientific and technological statements and they have been proven to be true, just as it not an historical text yet many event has been confirmed and only a matter of time before all are and even if science and archaeology never catch up to the bible I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is absolute truth.
I believe a curse was pronounced on Joseph’s bloodline (please correct me if i’m wrong),Satan may have thought he put a spoke in God’s plan but Mary was also of the line of David, I see God as a master chess player He wins every-time.