Was Mary Sinless?

[flocker54]

From a discussion elsewhere I had about the nature of Sin...


I don't agree. Jesus' flesh and human spirit had no sin at all. Jesus was likely given Mary's DNA but without Joseph's DNA because Joseph would then have taken credit for a "Work" in producing Christ. Flawed Works had to be atoned for and could not produce Eternal Life. Jesus was Eternal Life and was the product of God's Work alone.

DNA can apparently produce defective combinations, but in Mary's case it appears that God "healed" any possible defects in the order of these chemical combinations and the state they were in. The flesh within her imperfect flesh was rendered perfect as far as Christ's being was concerned.

Because human Works are carried on through reproduction, all of mankind, except for Christ, have inherited a Sin Nature and cannot, apart from Christ's Grace, obtain Eternal Life. All of us inherit human DNA as well as a sin-infected human spirituality that disqualifies us from obtaining Eternal Life apart from Christ's Grace.

We all sin, even though through Christ our New Christian Nature may prevail over our Sin impulses--not perfectly but sufficient to show the Nature that we have chosen to reign in our lives. Inheriting human DNA means we inherit flawed Human Flesh. But the Sin is not in the fleshly flaws, eg diseases but rather in the spiritual corruption.

The flesh and the spirit are two separate things. Before we do any Sin we have already been born with a contaminated spiritual nature and will Sin as soon as we are able.

Again, the trial we undergo in life is in proving what Nature we wish to prevail--our New Nature from Christ, which desires to submit to Christ's Righteousness, or our carnal Nature, which wishes to make choices independent of God, even if at times those choices agree with God's choices.

The real battle is in choosing to partner with God *always,* because this proves what Nature we choose to have and to dominate in Eternity. It is not our Sin Nature that condemns us in Eternity. Rather, it is in our choice for Christ, producing a New Nature, or not.

no

 

[flocker54]

From a discussion elsewhere I had about the nature of Sin...


I don't agree. Jesus' flesh and human spirit had no sin at all. Jesus was likely given Mary's DNA but without Joseph's DNA because Joseph would then have taken credit for a "Work" in producing Christ. Flawed Works had to be atoned for and could not produce Eternal Life. Jesus was Eternal Life and was the product of God's Work alone.

DNA can apparently produce defective combinations, but in Mary's case it appears that God "healed" any possible defects in the order of these chemical combinations and the state they were in. The flesh within her imperfect flesh was rendered perfect as far as Christ's being was concerned.

Because human Works are carried on through reproduction, all of mankind, except for Christ, have inherited a Sin Nature and cannot, apart from Christ's Grace, obtain Eternal Life. All of us inherit human DNA as well as a sin-infected human spirituality that disqualifies us from obtaining Eternal Life apart from Christ's Grace.

We all sin, even though through Christ our New Christian Nature may prevail over our Sin impulses--not perfectly but sufficient to show the Nature that we have chosen to reign in our lives. Inheriting human DNA means we inherit flawed Human Flesh. But the Sin is not in the fleshly flaws, eg diseases but rather in the spiritual corruption.

The flesh and the spirit are two separate things. Before we do any Sin we have already been born with a contaminated spiritual nature and will Sin as soon as we are able.

Again, the trial we undergo in life is in proving what Nature we wish to prevail--our New Nature from Christ, which desires to submit to Christ's Righteousness, or our carnal Nature, which wishes to make choices independent of God, even if at times those choices agree with God's choices.

The real battle is in choosing to partner with God *always,* because this proves what Nature we choose to have and to dominate in Eternity. It is not our Sin Nature that condemns us in Eternity. Rather, it is in our choice for Christ, producing a New Nature, or not.

no

 

[bytheblood]

A small part to play in pointing the apostles to Jesus.

The Father put everything into the Son's hands from creation to the end of all things.

We only know the Father through the Son.

No one has ever known the Father.

No one has ever seen the Father.

If anyone said they saw God in the O.T they were seeing

" Holy Spirit" is his name.

As the Son is a human soul and Deity in union?
The Holy Spirit is a spirit (of angels) and Deity in union.

For example:

Before the Incarnation?
The Lord God of Israel was being both soul and Deity in union!

And they began to remove the foreign gods from their midst and to serve Jehovah, so that his soul became impatient because of the trouble of Israel. Jdges 10:16​

​

Jehovah himself examines the righteous one as well as the wicked one, and anyone loving violence his soul certainly hates." Ps 11:5​

​

'You will eat the old supply and clear out the old because of the new. Moreover, I will make My dwelling among you, and My soul will not reject you.'I will also walk among you and be your God, and you shall be ​

My people." Lev 26:10-12​

Keep in mind...
Deity is not soul.
Soul is a different nature/essence than Deity!

God is a spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth." ..... John 4:24​

​

​

Grace and peace!

" God is a Spirit ", John 4:24 as you correctly pointed out, but in Lev. 26:10-12, as you also pointed out, God possesses a soul also. We are also spirits who possess souls, made in His image, but to live legally here on earth our spirits and souls are encased in bodies.





The name of the Father is unknown.

The name of the Holy Spirit is unknown.

I was in an exchange, I thought it was you, which that no one had ever seen nor HEARD the Father. Incidentally, NOTHING the Father does is a small part, conformation of who Jesus was/ is vitally important!

 

[bytheblood]

Correct, though it was the Word throughout the Old Testament and the New Testament.

The Father handed everything over to the Son.

Not entirely correct. When the Word "put on flesh " He disrobed Himself of His omnipotence (an angel came and strengthened Him), omnipresence ( Jesus walked or rode when, for33 yrs, He came to earth) and His omniscience ( didn't know who would sit on His right or left in His kingdom), and became a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death. " And now, O Father, glorify Thou Me with Thine own self with the glory(weightiness, full weight) which I HAD with Thee before the world was." John 17:5. Restoration," all power is GIVEN (or returned) unto Me in heaven and in earth." Matthew 28:17

 

[Lovette]

What if it could be shown that the two natures of the Son have always existed?
Existed prior to the Incarnation?
And were recorded in the OT Scriptures?

The Incarnation only revealed his two-natures being manifested in a human body.
The incarnation simply caused him to have a human body.
The Incarnation did not cause his two natures in union to originate.

If you could sit still for a moment to think objectively? I would show you.

God's humanity is shown through every OT protagonist, through Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, they were all archetypes of the Messiah, showing the Messiah's nature and character.

 

[Lovette]

My objection to the word medium, which I DO comprehend, can be, to the uninitiated, connected with, say, the Witch of Ensor, who was a medium, and was used for nefarious purposes. The wording is what I objected to. Spokesperson, which you used later in your post, eliminates the chance for confusion.

Then you're just being triggered, simple as that. Why didn't you say so?

 

[Lovette]

He hadn't manifested as the Son yet, the Father had not yet prepared him a body, it wasn't " the fullness of time." He, at that time, was God, the Word. If angels can appear as men are you saying that God, the Word, couldn't?

Yes he could, but only in visions, as Daniel saw in Dan. 7 and Isaiah in Is. 63. Unless the angel in the burning bush or the angel wrestled with Jacob was born of the holy spirit and conceived by virgin mary, that's God the Father acting through a proxy or a messenger.

 

[Lovette]

That's not correct, Lovette.

Heavenly places are not in this world.

Then you're rendering the Lord's prayer null and void.

 

[Lovette]

Now you are saying something different. Before you stated the new order came before our new bodies, now you are saying the opposite.

Well did the Lord return BEFORE our resurrection? In new bodies, as described in 1 Cor. 15? Yes or no?

 

[Lovette]

Really? Then how come so many can answer that question so easily but not you.

There is only He who is who He is. Our definition is irrelevant. The Lord Jesus Christ defines who God is because He is God. You seem to have a problem with that and would rather make your own definition of who God is. So be it.

So be it that you're folded on your own rhetorical quesion? And you still can't give a clear definition of God? God alone defines who God is - Gen. 1:1, Ex. 3:14. Lord Jesus Christ is God because He matches this identity, Jn. 1:3, Rev. 22:13. That's the clear definition I've been pressing you on, not according to you or me, but the bible.

 

[Lovette]

We are not debating the Trinity doctrine. We are not trying to define God the Father, Son or Spirit. There is no circle to go around except in your own mind if you cannot answer whether the Lord Jesus is the One and only God of the universe.

Millions of Christians can answer that question in the affirmative without having to jump through hoops. You seem to be unable, so be it.

Have a nice day.

No we're not, but the logical fallacy is the same. And I'm not debating with you, I expose your logical fallacy before initiating any debate.

 

[Lovette]

No I see nothing reasonable about it as defining what God is was never the question. God is God, there is only One. You think there is more because of human definition? That's on you, not me. Our definitions do not make God to be who or what He is. Isaiah understood, even if you can't.

Isaiah 37:16
“O Lord of hosts, God of Israel, the One who dwells between the cherubim, You are God, You alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth.

Isaiah 44:8
Do not fear, nor be afraid; Have I not told you from that time, and declared it? You are My witnesses. Is there a God besides Me? Indeed there is no other Rock; I know not one.’ ”

Have a nice day.

The question was a rhetorical one with malicious purpose. I never think of any more, all I think of is your inability to see and understand a logical fallacy. Isaiah understood God as the creator of heaven and earth, he gave a clear definition, while all you have to say is "God is God"? Pfff. Yeah, have a nice day, indeed.

 

[Chris67530]

No.

No only Jesus Christ was sinless

 

[Lovette]

We are not debating the Trinity doctrine. We are not trying to define God the Father, Son or Spirit. There is no circle to go around except in your own mind if you cannot answer whether the Lord Jesus is the One and only God of the universe.

Millions of Christians can answer that question in the affirmative without having to jump through hoops. You seem to be unable, so be it.

Have a nice day.

For the record, I've given you an affirmative answer in#895, it was you who rejected it and dragged it on.

 

[Genez]

God's humanity is shown through every OT protagonist, through Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, they were all archetypes of the Messiah, showing the Messiah's nature and character.

No sir...

The OT declares that the Lord God of Israel had two natures!
The Lord God of Israel consisted of Deity and Soul in union!

Easily looked over and missed.
Look here!

​

And they began to remove the foreign gods from their midst and to serve Jehovah, ​

so that his soul became impatient because of the trouble of Israel. Judges 10:16​

​

Jehovah himself examines the righteous one as well as the wicked one, and anyone ​

loving violence his soul certainly hates." Ps 11:5​

Deity is spirit.
Not Soul!

The Lord God of Israel was having a soul.
The pre-incarnate Soul and Deity of Jesus!

.....

 

[Inquisitor]

Unless the angel in the burning bush

The messenger (angel) in the burning bush?

Exodus 3:4-5
When the Lord saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!”
And he said, “Here I am.” Then He said, “Do not come near here; remove your sandals from your feet, for the place on
which you are standing is holy ground.”

If the ground is holy then who is standing in the burning bush?

Exodus 3:6
...Then Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God.

 

[Lovette]

No sir...

The OT declares that the Lord God of Israel had two natures!
The Lord God of Israel consisted of Deity and Soul in union!

Easily looked over and missed.
Look here!

​

And they began to remove the foreign gods from their midst and to serve Jehovah, ​

so that his soul became impatient because of the trouble of Israel. Judges 10:16​

​

Jehovah himself examines the righteous one as well as the wicked one, and anyone ​

loving violence his soul certainly hates." Ps 11:5​

Deity is spirit.
Not Soul!

The Lord God of Israel was having a soul.
The pre-incarnate Soul and Deity of Jesus!

.....

"Here" is debatable, "soul" is not in NIV.

Then they got rid of the foreign gods among them and served the Lord. And he could bear Israel’s misery no longer. (NIV)

The Lord examines the righteous,
but the wicked, those who love violence,
he hates with a passion. (Ps. 11:5)

 

[sawdust]

Lord Jesus Christ is God

Finally, how hard was that?

 

[Lovette]

The messenger (angel) in the burning bush?

Exodus 3:4-5
When the Lord saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!”
And he said, “Here I am.” Then He said, “Do not come near here; remove your sandals from your feet, for the place on
which you are standing is holy ground.”

If the ground is holy then who is standing in the burning bush?

Exodus 3:6
...Then Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God.

... Then the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush; and he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, yet the bush was not being consumed. (Ex. 3:2)

 

[sawdust]

No we're not, but the logical fallacy is the same. And I'm not debating with you, I expose your logical fallacy before initiating any debate.

What are you on about? What logical fallacy? Strewth! All I did was ask a simple question that millions could have answered with one word.