Was Christ's blood divine or human?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Was Christ's blood divine or human?

  • Christ's blood was divine (Acts 20:28) (1 Peter 1:18-19) (1 John 1:7).

    Votes: 2 10.5%

  • Christ's blood was human.

    Votes: 5 26.3%

  • Christ's blood was divine and human.

    Votes: 11 57.9%

  • I don't know.

    Votes: 1 5.3%

  • Other (Please explain).

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    19
S

sassylady

Guest
#81
#81
Divine and human. No blood can be manufactured in an unfertilized egg, and no blood ever passes from the mother to the baby through the placenta. When the egg is fertilized, that is when the fetus will begin to make blood. So it's the father that contributes the life to the egg.

Hebrews 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same
 
Jason0047

Jason0047

Banned
#82
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#82
sassylady said:
Divine and human. No blood can be manufactured in an unfertilized egg, and no blood ever passes from the mother to the baby through the placenta. When the egg is fertilized, that is when the fetus will begin to make blood. So it's the father that contributes the life to the egg.

Hebrews 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same
Click to expand...
Now, that is a good verse that suggests Christ's blood was probably only human blood alone.

Thank you.

With this passage, I am currently undecided.
 
C

ChristIsGod

Guest
#83
#83
sassylady said:
Divine and human. No blood can be manufactured in an unfertilized egg, and no blood ever passes from the mother to the baby through the placenta. When the egg is fertilized, that is when the fetus will begin to make blood. So it's the father that contributes the life to the egg.

Hebrews 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same
Click to expand...

Good scripture.

But I don't know where folks are believing that a child cannot have his mother's blood-type. Please do a Search on this because it's not true. There's a bunch of sites to help with this.

Try this link, just for one, it may help... Check out the mother with the AB blood type and the father with another type -
BLOOD TYPE CHART_CHILD FATHER MOTHER-PATERNITY determination by blood type - parents & child

I chose AB because alledgedly, only 4% of the world's population has it [at last count] so it will show that though a rare type, it can be passed to the child [like my Dad] and it's very highly likely that Christ had his Mother's for the Davidic Lineage.
 
Last edited:
D

DB7

Junior Member
#85
Dec 29, 2014
283
138
43
#85
Jason0047 said:
No. The blood of Jesus cleanses the saints from sin (1 John 1:7), gives the saints redemption (Ephesians 1:7), redeems the saints (1 Peter 1:18-19), justifies the saints (Romans 5:9), purifies the saints conscience of dead works to serve the living God (Hebrews 9:14), helps the saints to overcome the devil with it (Revelation 12:9-11).

In fact, Jesus was able to obtain eternal redemption for us by entering into the holy place (Heavenly Temple) by His blood (Hebrews 9:12). For Jesus' blood (i.e. God's blood) purchased the church of God (Acts 20:28). Jesus is now our Heavenly High priest between God the Father and man.

For without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin (Hebrews 9:22).
Click to expand...
Again Jason, just metaphorical, "For without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin", blood = death.
Irrespective of how Christ died, he would've paid the price for sin because God said, "..the minute you eateth of the fruit, thou shalt surely die...". Therefore someone had to die.
But it is ONLY Christ's obedience unto perfection which perfects us.
If Jesus did not attain to perfection, his blood or death would not have been accepted by God, and God would not have raised him the third day.
Obedience saves, not blood!
 
J

Jackson123

Senior Member
#86
Feb 6, 2014
11,769
1,370
113
#86
Jason0047 said:
It might not have been your intention, but the way you wrote the above makes it sound like you are teaching me something new (As if I was a child to the Scriptures). I assure you, I am very familar with John 1:14. I have read and studied it many times. Hence, the reason why I quoted it. The point I was trying to make with John 1:14 is that it speaks of the Incarnation, of which as you you know is speaking of God manifesting in the flesh. This is important as a part of my argument that Jesus' blood is both divine and human because that is exactly what Jesus was. He was both divine and human. 1 John 5:8 talks about how there are three that bear witness in the Earth; They are the spirit, the water, and the blood and these three things agree as one. Jesus yielded up the ghost (His eternal Spirit); And Blood and water came out of Jesus' side.



I am not suggesting that everything God touched would forever be holy. Although, I am sure if He wanted it to be, it could very well be that way. The point I was making and that you are ignoring is that objects or things can be holy. The Ark was holy. It was a holy relic. If they touched it, they would die. They needed to carry it on poles or staffs. In other words, God can make things holy or divine. We are not sure how God does this. We just know that He can do so. So if the woman with the issue of blood believed that some garment on Jesus could heal her, then how much more can his blood heal and or cleanse us?
Click to expand...
brother Jason,

I am sorry if my response offend you. It is not my intention to do so.

About the thing that God touch sometime God make it special, I agree but not always.

The fact that God is omnipresent can be interpreted as touching everything. Say if I present/sitting in the chair. mean I touching the chair.

Then everything is being touch by Him. And that not make everything Holy.

Only if He want it.
 
Jason0047

Jason0047

Banned
#87
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#87
DB7 said:
Again Jason, just metaphorical, "For without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin", blood = death.
Irrespective of how Christ died, he would've paid the price for sin because God said, "..the minute you eateth of the fruit, thou shalt surely die...". Therefore someone had to die.
But it is ONLY Christ's obedience unto perfection which perfects us.
If Jesus did not attain to perfection, his blood or death would not have been accepted by God, and God would not have raised him the third day.
Obedience saves, not blood!
Click to expand...
No. Do a study on blood and then do a study on the animal sacrifices. I mean why did they sprinkle blood on the people? Did not God essentially say in the Passover that when He will see the blood on the door posts, He will passover them (i.e. the Israelites)?
 
Jason0047

Jason0047

Banned
#88
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#88
Jackson123 said:
brother Jason,

I am sorry if my response offend you. It is not my intention to do so.

About the thing that God touch sometime God make it special, I agree but not always.

The fact that God is omnipresent can be interpreted as touching everything. Say if I present/sitting in the chair. mean I touching the chair.

Then everything is being touch by Him. And that not make everything Holy.

Only if He want it.
Click to expand...
I never said anything about how whatever God touched it would automatically be Holy. You originally said how there are no holy relics, and I pointed out that this is not the case. The Ark of Covenant, and many other objects in the Bible were considered holy.
 
Keeper

Keeper

Banned
#89
Dec 22, 2014
72
1
0
#89
Jason0047 said:
The reason why I brought up the Ebionites is because they reject Paul. Now, I know you said you like Paul, but you also said, I quote,

"there are parts of his thinking/preaching that I find misleading and therefore very, very dangerous."​

Which leads me to believe you do not think all of Paul says is divinely inspired Scripture.

Would I be correct or no, my friend?
Click to expand...
I do get where you were coming from. And if the "Ebionites" people find some parts of Paul's thinking misleading, then I and them do have things in common. But that does not make me an Ebionite. I've been told many times that I also share a lot with Buddhists... yet I am no Buddhist.

As to whether those "misleading/dangerous" passages were inspired by God or not; they were all divinely inspired. However, it's important to note that some food is only meant for "infants" whereas solid food is only meant for the grown ups. Paul's preaching/writings started at the very beginning of his own spiritual odyssey. As he grew older, the Spirit of God revealed him deeper aspects of the concept of Salvation... and by the time he tied, what seemed as easy as just Faith and confession turned out to be a lot more complex than that.

So why "misleading" and dangerous? Because a time must always come when princes HAVE TO grow up and face the scary side of our mission. So when they keep reading to one another the words of Hebrews 11 and all other "nice" things; they're endangering one another's odyssey (and I personally don't think Paul himself would approve of that).

Question #2: Why would the Spirit of God do that? Tell us what seems like a "lie"? Only Him can respond best. I just know that parents sometimes tell their children that they fell from Heaven and down on earth (to avoid explaining the whole Biological story of sex and birth... at least for a little while, until they're grown up and ready for the real truth.) Sometimes it 's better to protect our younger ones from the "Truth", until they're ready for it.

But still; all that is written in the Holy Bible was Divinely inspired.
 
S

sassylady

Guest
#90
#90
ChristIsGod said:
Good scripture.

But I don't know where folks are believing that a child cannot have his mother's blood-type. Please do a Search on this because it's not true. There's a bunch of sites to help with this.

Try this link, just for one, it may help... Check out the mother with the AB blood type and the father with another type -
BLOOD TYPE CHART_CHILD FATHER MOTHER-PATERNITY determination by blood type - parents & child

I chose AB because alledgedly, only 4% of the world's population has it [at last count] so it will show that though a rare type, it can be passed to the child [like my Dad] and it's very highly likely that Christ had his Mother's for the Davidic Lineage.
Click to expand...
Hard to explain but I didn't mean that the child cannot have it's mother's blood type, he/she certainly can and that would be why Jesus was a descendant of David. But the life comes from the father because blood is not manufactured until the egg is fertilized. Jesus came from a human egg and the Father supplied the life (blood). Which is why Jesus had no sin nature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.