|
|
Post by perroloco on Oct 14, 2010 15:46:26 GMT -5
Jesus was Perfect, Spotless, and Blameless. That is the only way that he could be the ultimate sacrifice for our sins. Prior to Jesus, the High Priest has to take a spotless, pure white lamb to sacrifice to Yahweh in the Holy of Holies for the sins of the entire Jewish Nation on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement). It is in this sense that Jesus (pure, spotless, sinless, perfect) could be the Atonement for the sins of the World from Adam to Infinity.
Parenthetically, although I believe the Virgin Birth to be symbolic, neverless, Jesus had to be born of an untouched woman because in the Hebrew tradition, it is man's seed (semen, the essence of humanity) that transmits sin. So in the Biblical story, Jesus had to be born of a "clean" (virgin, un-touched) woman, and not directly born of a egg fertilized by a "man's" sperm.
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Oct 14, 2010 23:44:38 GMT -5
Perro's first paragraph is the way I understand the purpose of Jesus and him being crucified since that is how people repented of their sin by making a sacrifice of their most perfect animal. Since Jesus's death is considered the ultimate scarifice for sin toChristians, one no longer has to scarafice an animal but just repent and pray. As for if he had children, I don't know. I would have to say it depends on the purpose. They would not be needed to save mankind from sin cause as the song says, Jesus paid it all. The Messiah has come, prophecy fulfilled. They would probably have a human life just like Mary did. Although she gave birth to Jesus, she still died. I believe the same would be of the children if he had them. His purpose wasn't to have perfect, omnipresence offspring.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Oct 15, 2010 6:46:32 GMT -5
Ok, Leja...let's get on with this conversation...I know there's more to this than the initial question.
|
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Oct 15, 2010 9:10:46 GMT -5
Jesus had to be born of an untouched woman because ... it is man's seed (semen, the essence of humanity) that transmits sin. So in the Biblical story, Jesus had to be born of a "clean" (virgin, un-touched) woman, and not directly born of a egg fertilized by a "man's" sperm. There it is! That's what I was hoping we'd get to. Both testaments support the conclusion that sin is actually transmitted paternally. For that reason, I believe that if Jesus (with his perfect self--regardless of our respective nuanced definitions of perfection) had a child with an imperfect woman, the child would also be perfect. The mother's sin state doesn't matter so long as the egg cell was fertilized by a perfect seed. It's the same reason Mary didn't need to be perfect for Jesus to be. |
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Oct 15, 2010 9:13:56 GMT -5
His purpose wasn't to have perfect, omnipresence offspring. Doesn't mean he couldn't have done it. It wasn't the angels' purpose to conceive nephilim who took over the world and led to the great deluge. Neither was it Adam's purpose to sin and spread death to all men. People in bible times and today work against their "purpose" all the time. |
|
|
|
Post by All Pledging Is Legal on Oct 15, 2010 22:25:38 GMT -5
Carribean
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Oct 15, 2010 23:25:13 GMT -5
His purpose wasn't to have perfect, omnipresence offspring. Doesn't mean he couldn't have done it. It wasn't the angels' purpose to conceive nephilim who took over the world and led to the great deluge. Neither was it Adam's purpose to sin and spread death to all men. People in bible times and today work against their "purpose" all the time. Tis true, people work out of their purpose all the time. But no where else in the Bible or even now is anyone needed to be perfect or flawless in order to fulfill their purpose. Jesus had to be "perfect" because of the mission he had to carry out, which I touched on in my previous post. |
|
{=}http://s2.images.proboards.com/cool.gif{/=}
