Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: RegulatorCountry

“I’ve always been puzzled by the awkwardness of this, as Eve was Adam’s mate, not his mother.”

There’s no awkwardness at all. Types can work out in different ways. Think about it:

Eve drew her flesh from whom? Adam. They were not just of the same flesh because of marriage. They really were of the same flesh (Gen 2:23).

Christ drew His flesh from whom? Mary. The only way for them to be of the same flesh was for Mary to carry Jesus as a child in her womb as a baby.

There’s no awkwardness there. That’s just the only way it could be done to be similar (same flesh) as Adam and Eve.

Once the first human pair was created, the only way a later pair could have one draw flesh from the other was for there to be a mother-child relationship. There is no other way without God creating a human outside of the human race. How would that person be truly part of the human race without a human mother as others had mothers? No, God the Father wanted His Son to be human in every way but sin so He had to have a mother.


84 posted on 09/17/2014 8:05:08 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]


To: vladimir998

Eve had no mother. Adam had no mother. Mary was clearly a special person, perhaps to the point of being singular among created human beings. However, we are told by scripture that all are fallen and sinful, and in need of salvation. Mary herself says as much. Therefore, this doctrine created via extrapolation built upon assumptions found nowhere in scripture, scholarly no doubt they might have been, is error.


86 posted on 09/17/2014 8:10:06 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

To: vladimir998; RegulatorCountry
Once the first human pair was created, the only way a later pair could have one draw flesh from the other was for there to be a mother-child relationship. There is no other way without God creating a human outside of the human race.

John the Baptist cautioned against thinking that God is bound by our genealogy.

And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. - Matt 3:9

That is why I reject any notion that Mary could have thwarted the will of God by simply saying "no." He could have replaced her until one said "yes."

To God be the glory, not man, never man.

91 posted on 09/17/2014 8:26:55 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

To: vladimir998; metmom; All

Eve came out of Adam via a rib. For the equivalent analogy to hold, then Mary must also have originated out of Christ via his own rib. (not Christ out of Mary).Therefore Mary cannot be the “second Eve”. Now spiritually, Christians are born again via the outworking of the Holy Spirit. We are born out of the substance of Christ....since he is the new Adam, then we as the whole body of believers are the New Eve...or more simply the Bride of Christ! If Christ is the new Adam then his Bride is the new Eve!

Hallelujah...praise God from whom all blessings flow!


99 posted on 09/17/2014 8:56:45 PM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

To: vladimir998
The only way for them to be of the same flesh was for Mary to carry Jesus as a child in her womb as a baby.

Who says they were?

369 posted on 09/19/2014 3:39:06 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson