Yes, Dean, I have been
repeating myself -- and this because neither of you have
adequately addressed my concerns; instead, you are always wont to change the
subject. Moreover, I have not seen much yet to suggest that you and
Judy even agree on this topic of Jesus' flesh. While you sometimes
uphold the biblical notion that Christ was born a genetic
descendent of David and Abraham, Judy strongly denies it. You, however,
are not being consistent, as there is an element of confusion
in your claim that the second Adam was unrelated to the first Adam: "We
were of the first while Jesus was of the second" (whatever that means),
which seems to imply that Jesus was not born of the one blood common to
all humans through Adam and Eve.
Bill Jesus IS the second Adam - how is
it you can not read the plain words of scripture?
"And so it is written, the first man Adam was made a living soul; the
last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is
spiritual, but that which is natural and afterward that which is
spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is
the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are
earthy; and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image
of the heavenly" (1 Cor 15:45-49) Oophs~! I may have quit too soon, he
goes on to write "Now this I say brethren that flesh and blood cannot
inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit
incorruption"
As I see it,
the problem you are having in processing our position, is lodged in
your inability to think of the Person of Christ in terms of two distinct
natures, one fully divine while the other completely human, with the two
working together in perfect solidarity, his humanity always conforming to
the greater influence of his divinity.
Corruption is never in solidarity with
incorruption .. see above. You are not understanding the ways of
God.
And so, I do
believe that Christ's human nature was common to that of all humans.
That, however, does not mean that I consider the Person of
Christ to be ordinary. Christ was anything but ordinary, and
this because he was also fully God; hence he was able to sanctify
himself (something no mere human could do), while at the same time defeating
the powers of darkness in human flesh.
If humans are unable to sanctify
themselves Bill - Why does God constantly tell them to do just that under
the law
and also in the New
Covenant?
But it took
human flesh in the likeness of ours for the sanctification of his
flesh to have any bearing upon our flesh: for he could not be our
Kinsmen Redeemer if he were not first our brother, Dean, our
kinfolk; nor could he be our high priest unless he was first made able
to commiserate with our plight. But these he is, precisely because of
our common humanity. Bill
Covenant means that the flesh dies Bill - His was
layed down on a sinner's cross at Calvary for us; ours is to be a living
sacrifice that is layed on the altar daily. I think you people are
obsessed with humanity - a word that I have yet to find in either OT or
NT.
cd: I have combined both responses Bill as I believe they are
the same and need the same answer. A few days ago you claimed that we
could not hear your statement that Christ did not sin-well I heard you now
you hear this. We..believe..Christ .. Came..In ..The .. Flesh..But.. WE..
Don't.. Think.. He.. was..As.. Weak..As..Common..Man.The below words only
confuse the issue.Yes Christ was of Abraham/David and He had blood just as
we do-but His flesh wasn't weak as He kept it strong. If it was
weak show me one biblical account where it was weak-and we will
discuss that but to keep repeating yourself isn't getting us anywhere?You
say there was no difference we say there was-prove it.Think about it
Christ didn't sin? Thanks bro.
----- Original Message -----
His death was the victory not
His life.
Why then all the fuss about his human nature?
Would it have mattered if he had sinned while living in the flesh? Of
course it would. The Christ of Scripture is the whole package, brother:
his life, death, and resurrection -- not just a slab of meat
hanging on a tree. May I suggest that you purchase and read Gustaf
Aulen's Christus Victor? The tyrants were plural,
Dean: sin, death, and the devil. Leave one of them out and
Christ is not the Victor you imagine.
Bill
----- Original Message
---
If Jesus was not of the first
Adam, he was not his descendant and, therefore, was not qualified to
bear his name. You and yours are way to American in this regard: you
have no respect for heritage, lineage, kinship, family ties. To
know the Jesus of Scripture, you need know him as he was in his
culture, Dean -- not
yours.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by
Plains.Net, and is
believed to be clean.
