Mary’s “grace” was not the issue. Mary was a virgin .. which was key.
However, the reason Jesus was “sinless” at birth was because of the “BLOOD” flowing in his veins.
It is a medical FACT that the blood of the FATHER is passed to the child. Therefore, Jesus blood was of his FATHER, and not of his mother.
If you go back and look at the history of Jewish sacrifices, you will note that it was always the “blood” of the animals that was important .. meaning that the animal had to be pure and spotless or their blood was not considered pure enough for the sacrifice.
Jesus is our “sacrifice” .. and therefore his BLOOD had to be pure and spotless.
I was talking about it from a “spiritual sense”.
But Bible is “quiet” about that aspect, about the blood.
Please provide a link to this medical fact. I never heard of it.
Child and father can have different blood types.
Fetal cells can enter the maternal circulation and live in the mother, and maternal cells can enter the fetal circulation and live in the baby, but there are no paternal cells that enter the fetus, barring the one sperm cell joining with the ovum at conception.
I don’t think the Bible gives us any grounds as to the actual mechanism of the Incarnation anyway.
In fact, this isn't a medical fact. To the best of my knowledge, it originated with M. R. DeHaan, a medical doctor and theologian who wrote a book titled The Chemistry of the Blood back in the 1940s speculating on the sinless nature of Jesus.
In fairness to DeHaan, I don't believe he was intentionally trying to teach a corrupted Christology with respect to Christ's human nature. But he was writing prior to the discovery of DNA, and he probably could not have known at the time that human blood, like all other tissue, is a blend of the mother's and father's genes.
If a child's blood is passed exclusively from his father, then I would also have his blood type. I don't. I have my mother's.