- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Technically all human are not born of the union of a male and female gamete. One of a set of identical twins is born of binary fission (mitosis) and not of the fusion of the male and female gametes.
Scripture ignores that technicality.
Hi ed,
Yes Jesus was the son of a virgin.
Hi Nick,
Well guess what then “no-sperm” was required.
The bible does not use modern terminology,
but instead is descriptive to the meaning.This too means no-sperm was required:
“not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man” (John 1:13)
EdJ,
You are misusing John 1:13 and Jesus is the Son of David as of blood. The will of flesh is questionable as Mary was willing to do as her God willed.
John 1:13 is speaking of those born of the Spirit.
“not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man” (John 1:13)
Hi Kerwin,
Are you suggesting that those word are to the exclusion of Jesus’ physical birth?
_______________
God bless
Ed JHi 94,
Yes.
Faith first.
But Romans 10 misleads many.
It is correct but applies to the saved not the unsaved
Romans 1 gives the evidence of context and whom it applies to.
Hi ED,
Nicodemus understood.
When speaking about REBIRTH to Jesus he said
“How can a man be born when he is old.
He cannot enter his MOTHER”S womb and be BORN can he?’
No FATHER mentioned
Hi Kerwin:
The scriptures state that the devils believe, and whether or not they believe in their heart or not is unsure. One can believe with the mind.
But for sure the devils do not confess Jesus as Lord as Romans 10:9-10 states one has to do for salvation. Without repentance their is no salvation, and the works of obedience are evidence that one has believed and has repented.
Love in Christ,
MartyHi,
God can grant forgiveness of the sins of men if they obey.
There is no such help for angels heb 2.16
Demons know their fate.
Hi Kerwin:
And so, the second of the identical twins does not have a father? This mitosis could not have occurred if their had not been the sperm of man fertilize an egg in the initial pregnancy.
Anyway, what I was trying to do is to show BD that there was a difference between John being born of a woman and Jesus being born of a woman so that perhaps he might believe the truth and be saved. He was trying to make a comparison between the two.
Love in Christ,
MartyHi Nick:
This is what the scripture states:
Rom-10-9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.Rom-10-10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Rom-10-11For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Rom-10-12For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
Rom-10-13For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Rom-10-14How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
Rom-10-15And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things
(You don’t preach the gospel to the saved but to the unsaved)
Hi ($,
Yes all those principles are true.
But that does not alter the fact that this book, and all those of the brothers are written to the saved.
God is not a God of confusion who gives one message by Peter at Pentecost and a different one by Paul in Rom 10.
Rom1.7
“To all who are beloved of God, called as saints”
942767,
Mitosis is looked at differently. The parent is the original child that became two children. In practice they are both credited with being the children of the individual who contributed the male gamete for the act of procreation.
In parthenogenesis you have much the same thing except that the female ovum has all the genetic information needed. There is no recorded cases if pure parthenogenesis in humans and offspring is always a female. There is a unique case where a human chimera was born who was half parthenogenesis and half fusion. He was a male. If God chose to use parthenogenesis then he would have also used genetic manipulation so the child became a male instead of a female. Note that in that case Mary’s father would have contributed the male gamete and he mother the female as Mary would have passed those genes to her child just like with mitosis that forms a child.
There is also the possibility that God chose to preserve David’s gamete and used artificial insemination but I rank it as a low possibility as it is not revealed in his origins.
Hi Nick:
Hi ($,
You say:
Yes all those principles are true.
But that does not alter the fact that this book, and all those of the brothers are written to the saved.
God is not a God of confusion who gives one message by Peter at Pentecost and a different one by Paul in Rom 10.
I say:
The Word of God is true, and that you are the one who is confusing the issue. There is no disagree in the Word of God. It is only when people add their opinions that the confusion come.
Love in Christ,
MartyHi Kerwin:
You say:
942767,
Mitosis is looked at differently. The parent is the original child that became two children. In practice they are both credited with being the children of the individual who contributed the male gamete for the act of procreation.
In parthenogenesis you have much the same thing except that the female ovum has all the genetic information needed. There is no recorded cases if pure parthenogenesis in humans and offspring is always a female. There is a unique case where a human chimera was born who was half parthenogenesis and half fusion. He was a male. If God chose to use parthenogenesis then he would have also used genetic manipulation so the child became a male instead of a female. Note that in that case Mary’s father would have contributed the male gamete and he mother the female as Mary would have passed those genes to her child just like with mitosis that forms a child.
There is also the possibility that God chose to preserve David’s gamete and used artificial insemination but I rank it as a low possibility as it is not revealed in his origins.
I say:
The scripture states that God is Jesus Father, and that settles it for me.
Jesus said this the Pharisees:
Matthew 22:
41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,
42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David.
43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,
44 The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?
46 And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Hi 94,
Jesus Christ forced them to acknowledge that natural sonship is not the same as sonship by the Spirit.
Hi Nick:
You say:
Hi 94,
Jesus Christ forced them to acknowledge that natural sonship is not the same as sonship by the Spirit.
I say:
Exactly, why do people like Kerwin try to figure out how God accomplished this? God created everything in this world, including mankind. The scriptures state that Jesus was “in the likeness of sinful flesh”, a man, but God is His Father and not man.
Love in Christ,
MartyMarty,
Do you understand what Jesus was saying?
Roman 1:3 states Jesus Christ is the son of David as of the flesh.
So obviously the answer to Jesus’ question “If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?” is as of the flesh.
Just like everyone that believes in him Jesus is the son of God as for the Spirit.
“Flesh is born of flesh and spirit is born of Spirit.”
The son of the Spirit is superior to the father of the flesh.
Hi KW,
Of course in the case of Jesus, God was his father according to the flesh.
So your last line is dubious.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
