the spiritual imperative of the virgin birth

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Your perspective is silly.
The church writers said it, but I don't like them, so they don't count. The issue is that this is historic Christian doctrine, orthodox, heretic, whatever, linking the sinlessness of Jesus with the virgin birth.

Honestly, Esais, your posts here have been among your worst, and I hope others that are actually interested in the topic will now come on board.

Your seed of Abraham idea was also really silly, you do realize that the issue is the physical transmission of seed.

Sorry you perceive me as silly because I don't accept as gospel truth things said by proto-catholic apologists and theologians.

I notice you haven't dealt with the SCRIPTURAL side of the issue, but want to stay focused on some 4th century Roman author whose actual identity is unknown.

Of course I realise the issue is the physical transmission of seed. And the Scripture says He took on Him the seed of Abraham. The wording flies contrary to what would be expected if the apostle agreed with Custance's ideas concerning the sin nature.

But since I am silly, I will leave you to your thread.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Sorry you perceive me as silly because I don't accept as gospel truth things said by proto-catholic apologists and theologians.

Calling writers from 200 AD (who are often called heretics for various reasons) proto-catholic is an example of why I can't take your writing seriously.

There is a Roman Catholic doctrine in this mix, the immaculate conception of Mary. As shown in the paper in the OP, understanding the virgin birth eliminates that doctrinal error, and also the divine implant, surrogate mother, error.

Beyond that, your idea that "seed of Abraham" or "seed of David" somehow obviates the distinction that Jesus did not have a human father to pass through the germ of the sin nature, is similarly a laugher.

Now that you leave, maybe we can get more substantive responses. I do wish you well, you do have much better topics, and I still await the answer to my very simple question that ended the last post.

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Is there any intrinsic difference, in terms of sin, between Jesus being born of a virgin, and the common Joe.
Your answer seems to be no, I just would like you to state it clearly, then we can move on.

[Steven Avery]

Arthur Custance - The Seed of the Woman - the spiritual imperative of the virgin birth
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index...in-birth.1048/

And I have been trying to improve this page.
It is not a singular essay, simply a compilation of interesting material.

Do you have a favorite theory or idea or exegesis as to how and why the Lord Jesus Christ could have a human body, and yet was without sin?

simply good effort?
overshadowing was a special divine implant, without Mary contributing?
virgin birth negated the sin nature passed through the male?
immaculate Mary?
supernatural impartation at some point, just for that purpose?
some other idea?

You can also indicate whether you feel this is fundamental, dynamic, important, or simply frill.

[Amanah]

I don't know, I just know he was tempted in all areas, just as we are and yet didn't sin.
He overcame sin in the flesh. He must have been capable of sin and yet did not sin.

[Steven Avery]

Could Jesus have resisted and overcome sin as a regular Joe? Was his eternal Holy Spirit fatherhood an intrinsic part oh Jesus being the Lamb without spot or blemish?

[Amanah]

The flesh of Jesus was holy because He was the Son of God.

Luke 1:35
King James Version
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

He is sinless like Adam.

Both born sinless
Both Sons of God
Both with free choice

[Steven Avery]

Excellent verse! This even defines ‘Son of God’ by the virgin birth.
Thus solidifying the connection.

This is often missed in Christian circles because of God the Son confusion.

Also this answers the islamist “God has no Son”, since they accept the virgin birth, with an errant twist or two.