The importance of a virgin birth

[Galad Aglaron]

crazybrain 1

Jesus was the blood son of Mary, (and God depending on what you believe), not both Mary and Joseph. Joseph in effect adopted Jesus making him the legal hier to Joseph's lineage from David, while also being a blood descendant of David through his mother, Mary. I wouldn't think there would be a problem.

Mary was a relative of Elizabeth, wife of the priest Zechariah of the priestly division of Abijah, who was herself part of the lineage of Aaron and so of the tribe of Levi. The House of David is of the tribe of Judah.  

[crazybrain 1]

Fushigi na Butterfly

Priestley wasn't asking how Jesus was related to Joseph or considered a descendent of David- he was asking why it would be a problem if Jesus was actually a blood descendent of Joseph as well, ie: conceived the way every other human being is.

I answered that though. If Jesus came about the way all the rest of us do, he would have inherited the sin nature like the rest of humanity, and the consequences of that sin. He wouldn't have been the perfect sacrifice that was required for the job.  

[crazybrain 1]

`apple dumpling

How is Jesus the biological son of God when no DNA came from God. I would argue God doesn't have DNA, Jesus simply came into being within the womb. That's always been my understanding, anyway.

I'd wager his personal testimony as being the son of God would count for something. And you can't prove that there wasn't any DNA from God, just like you can't prove that there was. there's no DNA sample to be had in order to prove it. Take him at his word, or don't.  

[Priestley]

crazybrain 1

Fushigi na Butterfly

Priestley wasn't asking how Jesus was related to Joseph or considered a descendent of David- he was asking why it would be a problem if Jesus was actually a blood descendent of Joseph as well, ie: conceived the way every other human being is.

I answered that though. If Jesus came about the way all the rest of us do, he would have inherited the sin nature like the rest of humanity, and the consequences of that sin. He wouldn't have been the perfect sacrifice that was required for the job.

See, what I asked implied that I already knew about the nature of sacrifice in the Bible, with focus on Jesus'. What you have said here is an answer to the question. What you gave before was an explanation of the nature of sacrifice in the Bible, with a focus on Jesus', which I already knew.

What puzzles me slightly is that, if Jesus is the only fitting sacrifice for us, why does Jesus himself ask us to carry our own crosses and follow him? Why is it necessary for us to sacrifice at all if his is the only fitting one? Why are babies sinful from the womb and therefore unfit to sacrifice themselves in adult life? What makes them that way?  

[Priestley]

crazybrain 1

`apple dumpling

How is Jesus the biological son of God when no DNA came from God. I would argue God doesn't have DNA, Jesus simply came into being within the womb. That's always been my understanding, anyway.

I'd wager his personal testimony as being the son of God would count for something. And you can't prove that there wasn't any DNA from God, just like you can't prove that there was. there's no DNA sample to be had in order to prove it. Take him at his word, or don't.

Assuming that Jesus was real and the gospels contain accurate, word-for-word quotes from Jesus, there is still the issue of whether he was telling the truth. I could say that I am the Son of God but you wouldn't know for sure I was lying unless you were me. You'd be able to get a good idea whether I was or not given the understanding of psychology, biology and body language we have today, but you wouldn't know with 100% certainty.

As for DNA: Since God is spirit, it is reasonable that DNA being matter does not pertain to God in the same way that it pertains to humans. However, it's entirely possible that God used DNA to create Jesus. The egg itself doesn't have enough chromasomes to create life - it needs the additional chromosomes from the sperm. Unless, of course the Jesus was entirely designed with a complete DNA sequence by God. Then it would be possible. This would negate any blood ties to Mary, however, so Jesus wouldn't technically be related to David at all. To be of the line of David, he had to have some of Mary's DNA. This is affected by the issue of humanity's imperfection/sin-nature. What other variations am I missing? This is no proof but it's consideration of different possibilities from what we know.

Regardless, "you can't prove it either way so accept it's true" doesn't wash.  

[Fushigi na Butterfly]

Priestley

crazybrain 1

Fushigi na Butterfly

Priestley wasn't asking how Jesus was related to Joseph or considered a descendent of David- he was asking why it would be a problem if Jesus was actually a blood descendent of Joseph as well, ie: conceived the way every other human being is.

I answered that though. If Jesus came about the way all the rest of us do, he would have inherited the sin nature like the rest of humanity, and the consequences of that sin. He wouldn't have been the perfect sacrifice that was required for the job.

See, what I asked implied that I already knew about the nature of sacrifice in the Bible, with focus on Jesus'. What you have said here is an answer to the question. What you gave before was an explanation of the nature of sacrifice in the Bible, with a focus on Jesus', which I already knew.

What puzzles me slightly is that, if Jesus is the only fitting sacrifice for us, why does Jesus himself ask us to carry our own crosses and follow him? Why is it necessary for us to sacrifice at all if his is the only fitting one? Why are babies sinful from the womb and therefore unfit to sacrifice themselves in adult life? What makes them that way?

Because we're to live as Jesus lived. His sacrifice is the only acceptable one to God for the forgiveness of sins, but ours is necessary only insofar as it allows us to understand and follow God with our whole hearts.

Personally, I believe we are born with the capability and assurance that we will sin, not the taint of sin itself. As infants, we have yet to sin, and therefore no need of forgiveness. It's only when we sin that we need a Mediator, and only when we have the capability to understand that we have sinned, ie: the choice to sin because we actually know the difference between right and wrong, that we can sin.  

[Priestley]

Fushigi na Butterfly

Priestley

crazybrain 1

Fushigi na Butterfly

Priestley wasn't asking how Jesus was related to Joseph or considered a descendent of David- he was asking why it would be a problem if Jesus was actually a blood descendent of Joseph as well, ie: conceived the way every other human being is.

I answered that though. If Jesus came about the way all the rest of us do, he would have inherited the sin nature like the rest of humanity, and the consequences of that sin. He wouldn't have been the perfect sacrifice that was required for the job.

See, what I asked implied that I already knew about the nature of sacrifice in the Bible, with focus on Jesus'. What you have said here is an answer to the question. What you gave before was an explanation of the nature of sacrifice in the Bible, with a focus on Jesus', which I already knew.

What puzzles me slightly is that, if Jesus is the only fitting sacrifice for us, why does Jesus himself ask us to carry our own crosses and follow him? Why is it necessary for us to sacrifice at all if his is the only fitting one? Why are babies sinful from the womb and therefore unfit to sacrifice themselves in adult life? What makes them that way?

Because we're to live as Jesus lived. His sacrifice is the only acceptable one to God for the forgiveness of sins, but ours is necessary only insofar as it allows us to understand and follow God with our whole hearts.

Personally, I believe we are born with the capability and assurance that we will sin, not the taint of sin itself. As infants, we have yet to sin, and therefore no need of forgiveness. It's only when we sin that we need a Mediator, and only when we have the capability to understand that we have sinned, ie: the choice to sin because we actually know the difference between right and wrong, that we can sin.

Ah, see, I'm looking at the virgin birth as symbolism of divinity, rather than an exceptional miracle.

Virgin birth occurs in a lot of mythology because of its nature. There is a recognition that sex (or some form of implantation) need take place in order for a woman to get pregnant. A woman getting pregnant without sex is seen to be the impossible made possible and, therefore, a miracle. I define Jesus as being divine by who he was and his mission, not how he was born.  

[Xandris]

I think that a virgin birth helps set Jesus apart from the rest of the people in the Christian mythos. It's just one more thing about him that points him out as different and special, more than a mere man, or even another prophet. It allowed God a chance, through his angels, to impress upon Mary and Jospeph that when their child started to know things beyond his years or proclaim to be divine that he wasn't possessed or blasphemous. It might be harder for later Christians to believe that a mere man was the son of God. If you pretend that you know nothing about Jesus and his life and his works, wouldn't you be a little more skeptical that all these miracles worked by some carpenter's son?

By the same token, Mohammed, Ghandi and Mother Theresa were all exceptional people, but all of them were born of man and woman. That doesn't make their lives any less meaningful, or shine any less in the eyes of the world. But, they're not worshipped like a deity. They're all seen as people. People very blessed, some considered a prophet, but not a diety. They all had a good message and lived good lives, and deserve to be remembered, but as people, not as a savior.

I also thought it would be a little difficult to profess oneself to be the son of God when a human being is your biological father. A cult worshipping Joseph might have sprung up. Once Jesus reached adulthood, all pretense of Joseph being his 'real' father dropped away and the only father he talked about was God. Maybe he would have had a harder time communicating with God if he were fully human. Maybe, despite being part of a divine plan, having two human parents would have rendered him NOT divine. Of course, this entire paragraph is out-there speculation, but I think that to understand why a virgin birth is important, we need to consider what things would be like if it HADN'T happened.  

[Xandris]

Priestley

What puzzles me slightly is that, if Jesus is the only fitting sacrifice for us, why does Jesus himself ask us to carry our own crosses and follow him? Why is it necessary for us to sacrifice at all if his is the only fitting one?

To accept his sacrifice we must first rid ourselves of everything that's keeping us from him and take up the burden of living a life that he's called us to. To give up our favorite sins, material objects, and relationships that are standing in the way. Accepting his sacrifice changes a person, as I think we all know. It puts a new fire in your heart, and the desire to do better, LIVE better, for him. But there are people there that will try to bring you down, tell you it's not worth it, that this whole Christian thing is a stupid idea and you should give it up now. There are things that you indulge yourself in that you'll start feeling guilty about, even as you enjoy them.

Yes, a Christian life is a life of sacrifice, constant sacrifice, as we find ourselves stumbling away from Christ and then getting pulled back onto the path. Take up your cross - the burden of doing right in a world of wrong - and follow him.  

[crazybrain 1]

Fushigi na Butterfly

As infants, we have yet to sin, and therefore no need of forgiveness. It's only when we sin that we need a Mediator, and only when we have the capability to understand that we have sinned, ie: the choice to sin because we actually know the difference between right and wrong, that we can sin.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but when exactly does this 'capability' manifest itself? Is there a certain age that this happens, or is it different for everyone? And if it's different for everyone, how can God hold everyone to the same standard?  

[Priestley]

Xandris

I think that a virgin birth helps set Jesus apart from the rest of the people in the Christian mythos. It's just one more thing about him that points him out as different and special, more than a mere man, or even another prophet. It allowed God a chance, through his angels, to impress upon Mary and Jospeph that when their child started to know things beyond his years or proclaim to be divine that he wasn't possessed or blasphemous. It might be harder for later Christians to believe that a mere man was the son of God. If you pretend that you know nothing about Jesus and his life and his works, wouldn't you be a little more skeptical that all these miracles worked by some carpenter's son?

By the same token, Mohammed, Ghandi and Mother Theresa were all exceptional people, but all of them were born of man and woman. That doesn't make their lives any less meaningful, or shine any less in the eyes of the world. But, they're not worshipped like a deity. They're all seen as people. People very blessed, some considered a prophet, but not a diety. They all had a good message and lived good lives, and deserve to be remembered, but as people, not as a savior.

I also thought it would be a little difficult to profess oneself to be the son of God when a human being is your biological father. A cult worshipping Joseph might have sprung up. Once Jesus reached adulthood, all pretense of Joseph being his 'real' father dropped away and the only father he talked about was God. Maybe he would have had a harder time communicating with God if he were fully human. Maybe, despite being part of a divine plan, having two human parents would have rendered him NOT divine. Of course, this entire paragraph is out-there speculation, but I think that to understand why a virgin birth is important, we need to consider what things would be like if it HADN'T happened.

I don't worship Jesus as a deity (or diety wink ), just like I don't worship any other man or woman.  

[Ixor Firebadger]

crazybrain 1

Fushigi na Butterfly

As infants, we have yet to sin, and therefore no need of forgiveness. It's only when we sin that we need a Mediator, and only when we have the capability to understand that we have sinned, ie: the choice to sin because we actually know the difference between right and wrong, that we can sin.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but when exactly does this 'capability' manifest itself? Is there a certain age that this happens, or is it different for everyone? And if it's different for everyone, how can God hold everyone to the same standard?

I think it's different for everyone, not everyone learns at the same speed. But God knows our hearts and knows just as well as we do, possibly even better, and knows when we should have known better.  

[Priestley]

Xandris

I think that a virgin birth helps set Jesus apart from the rest of the people in the Christian mythos. It's just one more thing about him that points him out as different and special, more than a mere man, or even another prophet. It allowed God a chance, through his angels, to impress upon Mary and Jospeph that when their child started to know things beyond his years or proclaim to be divine that he wasn't possessed or blasphemous. It might be harder for later Christians to believe that a mere man was the son of God. If you pretend that you know nothing about Jesus and his life and his works, wouldn't you be a little more skeptical that all these miracles worked by some carpenter's son?

It's funny that you should bring this up because it's highlighted in the Gospels. I'm sure you're familiar with the part where the people in Bethlehem recognise Jesus only as Joseph's son and not the prophet he had become.

I am skeptical of all the miracles that the gospels claim to have occurred, as I am with any extraordinary claims. I have always been a skeptic about the seemingly impossible. If it can be explained in a simpler manner, I tend to explore those possibilities.

Unfortunately, I have witnessed first hand people's capacity to exaggerate eye-witness accounts and embellish retold stories. The story of the nativity seems to me like such an embellishment after the fact. I would be more inclined to believe the testimonies if it wasn't exaggerated to that degree.

Xandris

By the same token, Mohammed, Ghandi and Mother Theresa were all exceptional people, but all of them were born of man and woman. That doesn't make their lives any less meaningful, or shine any less in the eyes of the world. But, they're not worshipped like a deity. They're all seen as people. People very blessed, some considered a prophet, but not a diety. They all had a good message and lived good lives, and deserve to be remembered, but as people, not as a savior.

Being a saviour need not require deity. An ordinary man can be a saviour. Any one of the people you mentioned could be a saviour as long as they saved someone. However, I view the act of salvation as an act of love, and I believe love to be a truly godly quality. This is what of God I see in all of us in differing amounts.

Xandris

I also thought it would be a little difficult to profess oneself to be the son of God when a human being is your biological father. A cult worshipping Joseph might have sprung up. Once Jesus reached adulthood, all pretense of Joseph being his 'real' father dropped away and the only father he talked about was God. Maybe he would have had a harder time communicating with God if he were fully human. Maybe, despite being part of a divine plan, having two human parents would have rendered him NOT divine. Of course, this entire paragraph is out-there speculation, but I think that to understand why a virgin birth is important, we need to consider what things would be like if it HADN'T happened.

Those to whom Jesus revealed that he was the Son were few. Even when he did, it was usually indirect, in the form of parable and metaphor to obfuscate it from those who would use it against him while allowing him to choose those who were genuinely seeking after him. Because of this amount of control, it was highly unlikely that a cult of Joseph would have sprung up, especially since the miracles that Jesus performed clearly attracted followers to him rather than to Joseph. Regardless, Jesus promptly directed their attention to God rather than himself, and yet Christians still choose to worship Jesus, which confuses me to no end.

Bearing all that I've said in mind and with my belief that there's divinity in all of us, no matter who our mothers and fathers are, I find that the virgin birth and the what-ifs unnecessarily complicate the issue.