Re: [TruthTalk] Uncleanness come via the woman

[Judy Taylor]

 

 

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 06:39:56 +0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Bill says that the incarnate Christ was holy because He was God on earth. 

Judy says He was not God on earth and His holiness came from the fact that He

had no earthly faither. 

 

JD when are you going to get a hold of yourself and stop putting words in my mouth?

The prophecy that the "virgin" would bear a child and his name would be Emmanuel

go together.  Why??  If sin is no big deal and rcc baptism can wash it away in infants

so easily then why did Fod's Son have to be born of a virgin?

 

Apparently her "generational curse" theory teaches that this curse is continued

only through the father. 

 

This is no theory JD; it is spiritual reality.  After all  it was BY ONE MAN that sin

entered this world and death by (or because of) sin. 

 

She ignores Job 25: 4  which says  " How then can a man be just before God?

Or, how can he be clean who is born of woman?" 

 

Do you know of any man who wasn't born of a woman JD?  Job is just stating

the obvious along with the fact that ALL men are born unclean because of sin.

 

"Uncleanness" comes via the Mom just  as surely as the father.  Houston, we have

a problem !!  jd

 

We sure have and I think you and Houston had better seek the Lord for some

wisdom.  He set the standard.  He holds the man accountable and He kept His

ONLY begotten son from the taint of sin by having him born of a virgin woman.

Imagine that???

 

-------------- Original message --------------
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

No I most certainly don't Dean; those are Bill's words and Bill's concepts.  Not mine.  What I believe is that

he was not born by procreation like the rest of us since he had no human father.  Mary may have

contributed an ovum but the male determines a child's gender and his spiritual inheritance also comes by

way of the father (ie the sins of the fathers are visited upon the children) and these are some of the reasons

why I can not accept the "orthodox" claim that he was exactly the same as us in every way.

 

 

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 06:03:19 -0500 "Dean Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

  cd: Judy is what Bill say in the below true-do you view Christ as being made of a special kind of flesh? 

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Taylor

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Sent: 1/18/2006 10:25:23 PM

Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Jesus , neither God nor Man

Certainly I think Jesus was born of God, Dean. And I will be glad to address that aspect of his person. But before going there I would like to clearly state that you seem to be making a different argument than Judy's. And if you are, then my question would not apply in the same way to you as it does to her. And so, I would like you to be sure you are truly affirming the same things as she, before you speak on her behalf.

 

From my understanding of Judy's position, she denies that Jesus was born a flesh-and-blood descendant of David through physical birth to Mary. She believes that God made a special kind of flesh for Jesus and put it in Mary's womb, and that that flesh was unrelated to fallen humankind, being only "similar" to that of us. That is, she believes Jesus' flesh was like Adam's before he fell. Hence because of her beliefs, Judy cannot affirm the teaching that Jesus is a physical descendant of Adam, and that he is the physical Seed of Abraham and the physical Seed of David, all according to the flesh.

 

You, on the other hand, write that you are not denying the biblical teaching that Jesus was the Seed of David according to the flesh and that he was born of David's flesh and blood. You appear to be affirming the truth that Jesus' humanity came from the fruit of David's "genitals" (Friberg) according to the flesh. In short, you seem to believe that Jesus really was David's "offspring."

 

Dean, that is a different position all-together from Judy's. My question for you is, did you realize what you were affirming when answering my question?

 

Bill