It says nothing on how they received breath to become living souls.No it is not. Read the Hebrew text. They became living souls from the earth.
It says nothing on how they received breath to become living souls.No it is not. Read the Hebrew text. They became living souls from the earth.
It says nothing on how they received breath to become living souls.
|
Oh , I wonder if it's the same one I've just removed myself fromI was focusing on another forum which as of today I have quit--way too over-moderated.Nice people, but extremely biased on certain subjects. The moderators are way too invested in their own opinions, and control the arguments to make their arguments reign supreme. That isn't the way I like to discuss things with brothers and sisters. Thank you so much for asking! I'm still here!
You completely ignored Luke 1:28.I think anybody who, like Mary, has embraced Rebirth remains filled with Grace. John wrote, "Nobody born of God practices Sin." Mary called God her "Savior." That implies inherent Sin that needed to be atoned for. If she was descended from Adam, and she was, she carried the spiritual deformity we all have and that required remediation by Christ.
The Savior was born of a Sinner?
No, I did not. I specifically addressed it. I stated that Mary is no more sinless than any Christian who has God's favor with them. The Born Again Christian naturally has God's favor with them, assuming they continue to walk in the Spirit. This is not a state of sinlessness, but rather, walking in sainthood. Mary was a saint. So is any Christian who faithfully walks with God.You completely ignored Luke 1:28.
The word "Sinner," as you are using it, conveys the idea of someone who regularly walks in sin by choice. This is different from calling a Christian "unworthy" due to their having a Sin Nature and the inclination towards Sin in their flesh.The Savior was born of a Sinner?
No.
Yes, Mary was infected with Sin, just as we all are, and could still have, by miracle, a sinless baby.Mary recognized Immanuel as her Sabvior,because,as the Angel told her,she was highly favored by God.
Which meant ,as the passage in Luke tells us, God filled her with his grace first. Which means she was no longer dead in her sins.
She couldn't be to carry a sinless baby in herself.
You too ignore the scripture.Yes because all have sinned. No-one who is born of God is dead in their sin anymore, that is a spiritual issue not a physical one. Being filled with grace doesn't remove the sin nature, we need a resurrected body for that to happen.
The sin nature, the corruption in our flesh Rom.7:23 , is passed down through the male line which is why Mary's ovum could be used but not Joseph's sperm. Sin entered through the man, not the woman. Rom.5:12
Hebrews 10:5
Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me;
A body made possible using Mary's ovum and the Holy Spirit creating the necessary material to fertilize the egg. That body has now been transformed and glorified and we shall receive one like it in the Resurrection. Phil.3:21
No,she wasn't "infected" with sin.No, I did not. I specifically addressed it. I stated that Mary is no more sinless than any Christian who has God's favor with them. The Born Again Christian naturally has God's favor with them, assuming they continue to walk in the Spirit. This is not a state of sinlessness, but rather, walking in sainthood. Mary was a saint. So is any Christian who faithfully walks with God.
The word "Sinner," as you are using it, conveys the idea of someone who regularly walks in sin by choice. This is different from calling a Christian "unworthy" due to their having a Sin Nature and the inclination towards Sin in their flesh.
Mary was unworthy, due to the Sin that resided in her. But she did not walk in that Sin, but chose to walk the overcoming life, not being sinless, but rather, being faithful, as we all should be.
Yes, Mary was infected with Sin, just as we all are, and could still have, by miracle, a sinless baby.
You too ignore the scripture.
Mary could not have been dead in her sins.
God said she was not so.
Why do we insist against that?
The savior grew in the womb of a woman dead in her sins?
Unable to understand the things of God,she understood she was most favored by God so to carry the Savior in her womb.
Luke 1:28 stands by God's will.
Suit yourself. But the Scriptures indicate that all descended from Adam, save Christ, are infected with Sin. Your choice not to believe it.No,she wasn't "infected" with sin.
Your choice to believe the Luke verse is to be ignored.Suit yourself. But the Scriptures indicate that all descended from Adam, save Christ, are infected with Sin. Your choice not to believe it.
Rom 3.23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
Rom 5.12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned.
Neither Romans passage specifically excludes Jesus, so you are adding to scripture. The other option, which no one seems to want to consider is, what would a Jew of the 1st century understand by hearing that someone was without sin.Suit yourself. But the Scriptures indicate that all descended from Adam, save Christ, are infected with Sin. Your choice not to believe it.
Rom 3.23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
Rom 5.12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned.
Neither Romans passage specifically excludes Jesus, so you are adding to scripture. The other option, which no one seems to want to consider is, what would a Jew of the 1st century understand by hearing that someone was without sin.
True.Actually it does exclude Jesus because it says sin entered through one man, hence the virgin birth. Only Mary was used in the preparation of Christ's body.
True.
That's why God was the father of Immanuel.
Why did sin enter the world through one man? When Eve ate of the forbidden fruit first.
Perhaps it would be better to say that she was a saved sinner. She said:Your choice to believe the Luke verse is to be ignored.
You can't actually truthfully,per scripture,insist Mary was a sinner.
Especially when she was filled with God's grace.
You have my deepest sympathy that to do so brings you satisfaction. And it is because you don't know what it meant for her to be filled with God's grace.
Prob not written I can Hear Mary say .I Too Am in Need of A Savior .i hear it now as typingPerhaps it would be better to say that she was a saved sinner. She said:
Luk 1:47 NKJV And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.
You are then linking sin to the physical DNA, which is a biological absurdity. Justify ignoring science to advance your theology with scripture. And I would note that Romans says "ALL". Of course, there is another option that when scripture refers to Jesus as a man, aka human, it is lying and thus He is excluded because he is a different type of entity. So, which is it, are you going to justify, with scriptural support, ignoring science to promote your theology or are you going to deny Jesus's humanity and make scripture lie.Actually it does exclude Jesus because it says sin entered through one man, hence the virgin birth. Only Mary was used in the preparation of Christ's body.
Two reasons, first being cultural and the second because the story is not historical but rather based on an older one.True.
That's why God was the father of Immanuel.
Why did sin enter the world through one man? When Eve ate of the forbidden fruit first.
Your adoration of a flawed human being is highly suspect and ignores biblical statements on the universal sinfulness of mankind, including Mary.Your choice to believe the Luke verse is to be ignored.
You can't actually truthfully,per scripture,insist Mary was a sinner.
Especially when she was filled with God's grace.
You have my deepest sympathy that to do so brings you satisfaction. And it is because you don't know what it meant for her to be filled with God's grace.