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.