I couldn't find a bumper sticker. :-)
Posted on 12/04/2006 7:52:47 PM PST by Pyro7480
"This is a fascinating discussion for me because it never occurred to me that there was any controversy about this."
Don't feel bad...neither did I!
Kosta,
Careful there in your efforts to explain what is unexplainable. What you are speaking of borders on Monophysitism.
Reality is that Jesus was 100% God(eternally pre-existent) and 100% Human with Mary's blood running through His veins.
Otherwise, He fulfilled no prophecies of the Messiah and was a liar (a thought which is ludicrous).
Revelation 22:16
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."
God came down and so interacted with Mary's egg that Jesus was conceived. Jesus had both Mary's human blood in Him, making Him fully human; and His own eternally pre-existent divinity as His very being.
How such a thing occurs is a mystery to us. But, nothing is Impossible for God.
I couldn't find a bumper sticker. :-)
Well,
I saw the movie that sparked this thread and loved it. It was very scriptural and relatively unimbellished by Hollywood's standards.
The portrayal of Mary was as a human being. This is what she was. She had the same conflicts within her that anyone would have in the circumstances that she faced (even to the point that she was troubled to have been engaged to Joseph whom in the movie she hardly knew). Yet, when faced with being the mother of the Messiah, it stayed strictly with Scripture showing her to be the humble and obedient woman that she was.
I liked its portrayal of Zechariah and Elizabeth as well as the Nazarenes who shunned Joseph & Mary. It shows a subtle fulfillment of the Scripture where "a prophet is without honor in his own home."
Here it was, the King of kings and Lord of lords, coming down to man and the world continued in all of its depravity and busyness.
Every Christmas, we celebrate the birth of Immanuel. The message I take away from the movie is, what do we do with this gift? Do we continue on our way and in our busyness with business as usual? Or do we stop to recognize the wonder before us? And bow and worship?
The movie was NOT ABOUT MARY. Though she is naturally a key component of the movie. I think it did a good job of portraying her as Scripture portrays her, and shows her being introspective - and pondering all of these things in her heart.
Oh, I don't know. The top part of the poster might work (though it may be a little hard to read going 60 mph). :)
My favorite Bumper Sticker:
"How could Jesus have been "by and of" her flesh if there was no "Mary" in Him? :)"
The scriptures are clear that Jesus was the "seed" of a woman and the "seed" of Abraham. Heb. 2:16-18, "For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people."
He got hungry and thirsty (Matt. 4:2; John 19:28).
He got tired from the journey (John 4:6).
He needed sleep and nourishment (Matt. 8:24).
If He was not born just the way everyone else was born (supernatural conception excepted) it could not be said "it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren" for there would be an important experience that He did not go through and a genetic history that excepted Him from the normal temptations and everyday trials.
What genetic history did Adam have? Was he not fully human? Did he not precede Abraham? Was Christ not the second Adam? What do genes have to do with this? Christ took the flesh of His Mother and in that flesh he was related to Abraham.
The "mechanics" is a unique term called Incarnation, which can be awkwardly translated as "enflesh." As far as I know, it is uniquely used only for Christ. No other conception is termed "incarnation."
Incarnation is a mystery (miracle) of God which, by definition, remains incomprehensible, yet you seek an "explanation."
The Bible says "conceive". That usually involves "conception". What do you think it means?
I think the term conception is used as "having been left with a child" and not in the modern sense.
Clearly, the Christian undertsanidng of the conception in this case is that God the Word took on the flesh (human nature) of Mary.
What do you mean by "Christ took the flesh of His Mother"?
The Holy Trinity and Christology are mind-boggling concepts which is why there are so many heresies. Do not think for a moment that you are the only one who considers himself a Christian who has not strayed into false thinking at one time or another.
I know I have had my own share of doubts and confusions, even when I though I had it "all right." And to this day my learning doesn't stop, for God is incoprehensible no matter how well we "understand" Him. The sin is not in being misled by your own logic, but by not repenting of your error when shown the mind-boggling revelation of God to His Church.
Mary was not a surrogate; she was His real Mother. The "surrogate" was used to show that a mother does not have to "create" life but can give birth to a life already existing.
The source of His humanity is His Mother's flesh which he "took" on Himself. Word the God is God and divine nature cannot mix with human nature. To speak of any "zygote" resulting from a divine "seed" and human ovum is pagan; the resulting embryo would be a demigod.
Through the flesh of His Mother, which He took on, He is related in His humanity to Abraham and to David. His "legal" lineage to David is through His adoptive father, St. Joseph. In Judaism, maternal lineage gives "Jewishness," but only paternal blood line (which includes adopted children) gives inheritance (although Mary was also related to David by blood if I am not mistaken).
How could Jesus have been "by and of" her flesh if there was no "Mary" in Him?
In his human nature, in her flesh. God the Word has no flesh, no form, nor shape, no humanity.
One thing I find very amusing about this is that it could be said that I and those of like minds are making Mary "more important" in the scenario of what actually happened
Her her importance cannot be overstated. She was the instrument that made Christ appear on earth. She was chosen for that miracle and tasked with that responsibility. You think being a mom is trying? What about when your Son is the Savior of the world?
Incarnation means to "enflesh." You tell me what that means in logical terms.
I thing that is much easier to understand than how a man and woman by the sacrament of marriage "become" one flesh.
"For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh" [Mat 19:4]
LOL! Maybe he'd be better off reading Tertulian, St. Ambrose and St. Augustine on the Trinity???
Regards
ping 3053
I can't believe I'm reading this stuff.
"God the Word has no flesh, no form, nor shape, no humanity."
Yikes! Now you're flirting with Docetism.
John 1:14-And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Numerous Theophanies of God the Word appeared in the Old Testament. (For example, Genesis 32:10-30) Further, in His resurrected body, Jesus had a physical body (glorified) which ate, walked, and could be felt.
God can take on whatever form he wishes. He doesn't need human agency to take on human flesh. The ONLY reason that Mary was used was to fulfill Scripture. Christ Jesus was the seed of the woman and the seed of David according to the Scripture.
The Word became flesh.
He is not here. He has Risen!
He has risen, indeed!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.