Eve's Posterity

[Adziilii]

.
Eve's body was made from Adam's body. (Gen 2:21-23)

Consequently, when children are conceived by women that are biologically related to Eve, then the women and the children are biologically related to Adam: whether naturally-conceived or virgin-conceived makes no difference, i.e. every child that biologically descends from Eve also biologically descends from Adam.

● Gen 3:15 . . I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.

It's pretty much agreed by most Christians that Eve's predicted offspring was realized in Christ; which means that the baby Jesus was not only Eve's biological offspring but Adam's too.

So then; the only way to cut Jesus out of Adam's biological posterity is to cut his mother out of Eve's biological posterity; and I've yet to encounter anyone either online or in church able to do that.
_

 

[Adziilii]

.
I encounter Christians from time to time that sincerely believe Joseph was Jesus' stepfather.

However; in order for Mary's baby to qualify for a legitimate place in Joseph's genealogy as per Matthew 1:1-17, he had to adopt the lad because stepchildren don't have inheritance rights.

I've also encountered Christians who sincerely believe that the baby Jesus was an implant; i.e his mom was a surrogate mother instead of a real mother. But Jesus was conceived rather than implanted. (Luke 1:31)

The Greek word for Jesus conception is the very same Greek word for his cousin John's conception. (Luke 1:24, Luke 1:36)
_

 

[Sue D.]

God's Word tells us that , yes, Adam and Eve were the first parents and that God created them. That Did start the human population. But, then,the flood happened. The people who God created became more and more violent in their actions that He decided to destroy everyone Except Noah and his wife and children -- the only righteous people left in the world at that time. The earths' descendence Since then are related to Noah's family.


Jesus came into this world through Mary's womb by means of the Holy Spirit coming upon her. Joseph was Jesus' earthly father. Mary and Joseph continued to have more children -- in effect Jesus' half brothers and sisters. So Joseph could be considered the step-father.

Actually they both came down through the line of David.

"People" are free to believe anything they Want to. No one is Supposed to Try to force any belief on anyone else.

But 'we' Do have God's Word / the Bible.

The term "Christian" can be used in a variety of ways. A Christian has been applied to any person who goes to church at Christmas and Easter -- to a person who has accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Savior and is striving to live as Christ-like a life as possible. And a person who goes to a particular church simply because ' the rest of the family goes there' has been known to call themselves a "Christian" simply because.....


You comment concerning surrogacy -- Could be applied to Abraham and Sarah. God had promised them a child -- even in their old age. But Sarah got impatient and Did tell Abraham to go to her handmaid and get a child through Her. And that Did happen -- culturally it was 'done'. Hagar Was able to conceive and produce a male heir. And after That Sarah Also Did conceive as God told her she would -- Isaac.

So - in reality -- Hagar was a surrogate for Sarah.

Well -- I supposed a person Could call the Holy Spirit's coming upon Mary as an 'implant'. After all -- she'd not had a sexual relationship with any man yet. And That was the Only way she would have gotten pregnant. Never really thought of it That way. An 'implant' suggests that a human being did the implanting as it's done These days. Women have eggs implanted in them frequently if they can't conceive the natural way.

Jesus Christ Had to be conceived of the Holy Spirit and have Mary as a virgin as his earthly mother in order to be 100 % deity and 100 % human.

 

[Adziilii]

.

So Joseph could be considered the step-father.

● Luke 1:32 . . the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

It's very easy to prove that Mary's little boy was David's biological progeny.

● Acts 13:22-23 . . "I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfill all my will." Of this man's seed hath God, according to His promise, raised unto Israel a savior, Jesus.

● Rom 1:1-3 . . Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh

The koiné Greek word for "seed" in those two passages is sperma (sper' mah) which is a bit ambiguous because it can refer to spiritual progeny as well as to biological progeny; for example:

● Gal 3:29 . . If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed.

That seed is obviously spiritual progeny. But the seed in Acts 13:22-23 and Rom 1:1-3 is biological progeny because David's seed is "according to the flesh" i.e. his physical body.

So then, Jesus is David's kin by blood, but the problem is: David's throne passes down thru his son Solomon (1Kgs 1:28-35). Well, Joseph is one of Solomon's grandsons; but Joseph wasn't Jesus' biological father; so Jesus couldn't inherit the throne by birth. However, there is a legitimate way to circumvent that particular glitch.

At Gen 48:5-7, Jacob set a patriarchal precedent by adopting his own two grandsons Manasseh and Ephraim; thus installing them in positions equal in rank, honor, and power to his twelve original sons; thus legally increasing Jacob's total number of sons from twelve to fourteen.

Jacob's motive for adopting Joseph's two sons wasn't for himself; it was in sympathy for his beloved wife Rachel being cut off during her child-bearing years, which subsequently prevented her from having any more children of her own. Ephraim and Manasseh bring Rachel's legal total up to six: two of her own, two by the maid Bilhah, and two by Asenath.

Now, fast-forward to the New Testament where the angel of The Lord spoke to Joseph in a dream and instructed him to take part in naming Mary's virgin-born baby.

"She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus" (Matt 1:21)

Joseph complied.

"And he gave him the name Jesus." (Matt 1:25)

So Christ went in the books as Joseph's son because that's how it worked in those days when a man stood with a woman to name her child (cf. Luke 1:59, Luke 2:21). And from that day on; Joseph was identified by all, including Mary, as Jesus' father. (Matt 13:55, Luke 2:27, Luke 2:41, Luke 2:48)

Thus: Christ became Solomon's grandson by means of adoption, just as Ephraim and Manasseh became Rachel's descendants by means of adoption. That was the only legitimate way that Jesus could ascend Solomon's throne because stepchildren don't have inheritance rights.

NOTE: Just in case there's a man looking in and considering adopting his wife's children from a previous marriage; you need to be aware that should the two of you later divorce; she can legally make you pay child support for another man's kids because when you adopt them, thus giving them your name, the law and the courts identify them as yours; so you'd better give that some serious thought before taking the plunge.
_

 

[Sue D.]

Okay -- and your point Being?!

 

[Adziilii]

.

and your point Being?!

The manner by which Jesus Christ qualifies to inherit David's throne is typically of little interest to John Q and Jane Doe pew warmer; but it's of great interest to serious Jews.

I've yet to encounter one on the internet who accepts Jesus' adoption; they typically deny his claim to the throne on the basis of his not being one of Solomon's biological grandsons. But I think they kind of have to accept Jesus' adoption because their patriarch Jacob set a precedent for it.

The average Christian's problem with Jesus is usually relative to original sin rather than David's throne; i.e. if Jesus Christ really is David's blood kin, and if David really is Eve's blood kin, then Jesus Christ really is Adam's blood kin because Eve's body was made from Adam's body; all which goes towards proving that Jesus Christ falls within the purview of Rom 5:12 and Rom 5:19.

It's argued by quite a few Christians that Jesus' virgin conception protects him from Rom 5:12 and Rom 5:19. Well; that argument might have succeeded had not David been a genetic factor in Jesus' origin. You see, if Jesus really is David's blood kin, then obviously his mother is too; and if David's blood kin, then Jesus' mother is Eve's blood kin; and Adam's too seeing as how Eve's body was made from Adam's body. There really is no feasible way to cut Adam out of Jesus Christ's biological origin.
_

 

[B-A-C]

You might be interested in another thread about this subject, from a few months ago.

The scarlet thread

 

[Adziilii]

.
Heads up that what you're about to read could possibly make somebody angry and/or give them a headache.

Q: If Adam really was Jesus Christ's biological progenitor, then wouldn't he be complicit in Adam's transgression in accord with Rom 5:12 and Rom 5:19 just like everybody else?

A: Yes; if Jesus was to be fully human, then he had to accept a full human's liabilities. In point of fact; Christ didn't come into the world with holy flesh, he came with sinful flesh.

● Rom 8:3 . . By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh.

● Heb 2:16-17 . . For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham's descendants. For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God

Nobody is born free of Adam's sin; which is the reason why infants and underage children die the same as grown-ups. The poor things come into the world already condemned to die even before they're conceived in the womb. So then, had Jesus not been crucified, he would've eventually passed away of some other cause.

Q: If Jesus Christ was made a joint principal in Adam's sin, then how can it honestly be said that Christ was a lamb without blemish or spot? (1Pet 1:19)

A: Adam's transgression dragged his entire posterity into that one particular sin right along with himself; but Adam's sin didn't make his posterity evil. We're not talking about the so-called fallen nature here. The one is an overt act, the other is an intrinsic condition.

In point of fact: Adam himself was basically a sinless man at first. He wasn't compelled by an inherent evil within himself to eat the fruit. Adam's so-called fallen nature came upon him after eating the fruit rather than prior to eating it. That's a very interesting thought.

Christ is without blemish or spot because:

There is no inherent evil within himself. (John 14:30, 1John 3:9)

He committed no personal sins of his own. (John 8:29, 2Cor 5:21, Heb 4:15, and 1Pet 2:22)

The upside to Adam's transgression is that it isn't a sin unto hell. He and his posterity need only die in order to satisfy that one particular act's consequence (Gen 2:16-17 and Rom 5:12).
_

 

[B-A-C]

A lot of worms in that post. But you are mostly right.

Gal 4:4; But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law,

Isa 7:14; "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.
Isa 7:15; "He will eat curds and honey at the time He knows enough to refuse evil and choose good.
Isa 7:16; "For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken.

Rom 5:12; Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—

The good news about Rom 5:12; is that the passage doesn't end there.

Rom 5:17; For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
Rom 5:18; So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.

This why Jesus is not under Adam's sin.

Rom 8:3; For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,

There are verses that say if one or both of the parents are believers, the children "are clean".

1 Cor 7:14; For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy.

This opens a whole other can of worms. When infants die do they go to heaven? Even the ones who don't have saved parents?
Can they go to heaven if their names aren't in the Book of Life? If infants names are in the Book of Life, are some names erased as
people get older (obviously everyone doesn't get saved).

But you are also correct that Jesus committed no sin of His own.

Heb 4:15; For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.

1 Pet 2:21; For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps,
1 Pet 2:22; WHO COMMITTED NO SIN, NOR WAS ANY DECEIT FOUND IN HIS MOUTH;

1 Jn 3:5; You know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin.

But even though Jesus was sinless.... all of our sins was placed upon Him.

2 Cor 5:21; He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

1 Pet 2:24; and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.

 

[Adziilii]

.

A lot of worms in that post.

If my last post had worms, then this next is sure to have lots of great big fat nightcrawlers!

● Gen 3:6 . . When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate

The important thing to note at this point, is that Eve was unaffected by the fruit: she went right on naked as usual; experiencing no shame about it whatsoever.

● Gen 3:6-7 . . She gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.

For convenience sake; let's attribute their new perception to humanity's so-called fallen nature. The big question is: From where did Eve get it?

In the past, I was sure that the chemistry of the forbidden fruit had something to do with Eve's altered state of mind; but now I seriously doubt it because Eve was the first to eat the forbidden fruit, and when she did, nothing happened. She remained shameless and went about in the buff as usual. It wasn't till Adam tasted the fruit that something altered Eve's conscience; so I'm pretty sure that the underlying cause is far more serious than the chemistry of that fruit.

It's believed by a pretty large percentage of Christians that the fallen nature is inherited from one's parents; specifically one's biological father. But Eve was already in existence before Adam tasted the fruit; so he could not, nor did he, pass it on to her biologically by means of procreation or by means of his body part that God used to put Eve together.

We're left with two alternatives: either God did it to her or the Serpent did it.

My money is on the Serpent, a.k.a. the Devil (Rev 20:2)

He has the power of death (Heb 2:14) and is able to tamper with the human body and the human mind, e.g. Luke 13:16, Mark 5:1-5, and Eph 2:2.

If true that the Serpent did it; then Adam likely acquired his fallen nature the very same way; and all the rest of us too. So then; in order to protect Jesus from becoming infected with the fallen nature, it was only necessary to stop the Devil from getting to him in the womb. Easy peezy, lemon squeezy.

"Surely I was sinful at birth; sinful from the time my mother conceived me. (Ps 51:5)

Poor David, he got bit; but not so baby Jesus; the lad came to birth clean as a whistle-- untainted and scathed by any and all Satanic attempts to manipulate the nature of his human existence.

According to Eph 2:4, everybody, Christians included, have been victims of the power of death. The Serpent was apparently all set and ready to wield it the moment that Adam crossed the line and ate that fruit. It amazes me how quickly that power worked on Adam and Eve. As soon as he tasted the fruit, they immediately set to work clothing their naked bodies.

_

 

[Christ4Ever]

We're left with two alternatives: either God did it to her or the Serpent did it.

How about a third alternative.
Adam & Eve being one, so.........not until Adam himself partook of the fruit was the fall complete.

 

[Adziilii]

.

How about a third alternative. Adam & Eve being one

Humans haven't the power to even so much as change the color of their hair let alone the nature of their existence. (Matt 5:36)

It's amazing how successful the Serpent has been throwing suspicion off himself. Were I to credit just one person with the invention of Machiavellian-style subtlety, it would have to be him.
_

 

[Christ4Ever]

.



Humans haven't the power to even so much as change the color of their hair let alone the nature of their existence. (Matt 5:36)

It's amazing how successful the Serpent has been throwing suspicion off himself. Were I to credit just one person with the invention of Machiavellian-style subtlety, it would have to be him.
_

Keeping in mind that I was only adding a third alternative possibility to your two....

Who said anything about humanity establishing this condition?

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. Genesis 2:24

 

[Sue D.]

.



If my last post had worms, then this next is sure to have lots of great big fat nightcrawlers!

● Gen 3:6 . . When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate

The important thing to note at this point, is that Eve was unaffected by the fruit: she went right on naked as usual; experiencing no shame about it whatsoever.

● Gen 3:6-7 . . She gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.

For convenience sake; let's attribute their new perception to humanity's so-called fallen nature. The big question is: From where did Eve get it?

In the past, I was sure that the chemistry of the forbidden fruit had something to do with Eve's altered state of mind; but now I seriously doubt it because Eve was the first to eat the forbidden fruit, and when she did, nothing happened. She remained shameless and went about in the buff as usual. It wasn't till Adam tasted the fruit that something altered Eve's conscience; so I'm pretty sure that the underlying cause is far more serious than the chemistry of that fruit.

It's believed by a pretty large percentage of Christians that the fallen nature is inherited from one's parents; specifically one's biological father. But Eve was already in existence before Adam tasted the fruit; so he could not, nor did he, pass it on to her biologically by means of procreation or by means of his body part that God used to put Eve together.

We're left with two alternatives: either God did it to her or the Serpent did it.

My money is on the Serpent, a.k.a. the Devil (Rev 20:2)

He has the power of death (Heb 2:14) and is able to tamper with the human body and the human mind, e.g. Luke 13:16, Mark 5:1-5, and Eph 2:2.

If true that the Serpent did it; then Adam likely acquired his fallen nature the very same way; and all the rest of us too. So then; in order to protect Jesus from becoming infected with the fallen nature, it was only necessary to stop the Devil from getting to him in the womb. Easy peezy, lemon squeezy.

"Surely I was sinful at birth; sinful from the time my mother conceived me. (Ps 51:5)

Poor David, he got bit; but not so baby Jesus; the lad came to birth clean as a whistle-- untainted and scathed by any and all Satanic attempts to manipulate the nature of his human existence.

According to Eph 2:4, everybody, Christians included, have been victims of the power of death. The Serpent was apparently all set and ready to wield it the moment that Adam crossed the line and ate that fruit. It amazes me how quickly that power worked on Adam and Eve. As soon as he tasted the fruit, they immediately set to work clothing their naked bodies.

_

Genesis 3: 6 Adam and Eve were together when they ate the fruit -- she took some and ate 1st and then gave Adam some and he ate it -- Then both their eyes were opened at the same time. They both saw that they were naked at the same time and took fig leaves and put them together for coverings for themselves. Your comments are Your speculation.

And, yes, people inherited their fallen natures from Adam and Eve. We inherit our DNA from our biological parents. Why not let Scripture answer our questions.

The 'y' chromozone determines the sex of a baby.

When the Holy Spirit came upon Mary - Jesus received His 1005 divinity. There are those who speculate that Mary was impregnated by a Roman soldier -- thus making the birth of Jesus just like any other Jewish birth except being illigitimate And when Joseph discovered she was pregnant -- he would have had every right to have her stoned or 'put away' until her child was born. But an angel told him that Mary was pregnant by the Holy Spirit. So everything was okay.

There was No "easy peezy, lemon squeezy" involved. Every part of Jesus Christ's birth was planned by God and prophesied. The reason For His birth being both human and deity was so He Could die in our place / For us. He's the Only person who Could take our sins upon Him , die with them and then come back from the dead. Proving to mankind that He was Indeed God's Son.

Honestly -- some of your concept never have crossed my mind. I guess -- why would they -- they are Your speculations.


Your post #8 about infants who die. In order to accept Jesus Christ as personal Savior, a person has to be old enough-- mentally able to distinguish right from wrong. An infant --small child has no maturity to be able to do that. Now Some kids as young as 5 or 6 have been able to grasp their own sinfulness and their personal need For salvation. But that's because someone has taken time to explain those things from God's Word and God's grace enables them to understand. Most of the time, kids need to get older to really grasp sin / their Own sin / feel remorse for it. And, No, infants and children Don't die in the same condition as adults. Unless the adults are mentally challenged / can't understand right from wrong. Their own wrongness.

And maybe that's why God allows abortions --as abhorant it is To murder innocent children -- unborn babies -- they are under God's grace. Innocence

I Am curious, though. Why open all these cans of worms. Why all the negative speculations about things we Don't know. Maybe we Should simply be accepting God's Word as the truth -- He tells us all that He knows that we Need to know.

Or you simply like to play the devil's advocate?!

 

[Adziilii]

.
A question I sometimes get from people is: Why wasn't Jesus conceived in a normal fashion, i.e. Joseph as his biological father?

Just about every preacher, Sunday school teacher, author, and radio Bible teacher that I've ever heard or read in the last 50+ years attests that Jesus Christ was virgin-conceived because the so-called fallen nature-- a.k.a. the sinful nature --is passed on by men rather than women.

Well; other than double speak, rationalizing, academic logic, conjecture, and clever sophistry to defend their claim, none as yet have produced solid textual proof from the Bible that clearly, conclusively, iron clad, air tight, and without vagaries and ambiguity, substantiates the position. In other words: the teaching is actually a tradition rather than a fact.

IMHO: It was apparently God's wishes that Jesus Christ be the Son of God and the Son of Man. Had both his parents been human, that would've ruled God out.

I'm guessing that had Jesus gone to the cross as only human, his sacrifice wouldn't have worked. It had to be both God and Man up there.

I'm also guessing that Jesus needed to be both divine and human in order to be an effective mediator between God and Man.

NOTE: The "illusory truth effect" (also known as the validity effect, truth effect and/or the reiteration effect) is the human mind's tendency to believe information to be correct after repeated exposure. This phenomenon was first identified in a 1977 study at Villanova University and Temple University.

In a nutshell: if people are told an unsubstantiated statement often enough by sources they trust; in time their minds will be conditioned to believe the statement is true.
_

 

[Sue D.]

.
A question I sometimes get from people is: Why wasn't Jesus conceived in a normal fashion, i.e. Joseph as his biological father?

Just about every preacher, Sunday school teacher, author, and radio Bible teacher that I've ever heard or read in the last 50+ years attests that Jesus Christ was virgin-conceived because the so-called fallen nature-- a.k.a. the sinful nature --is passed on by men rather than women.

Well; other than double speak, rationalizing, academic logic, conjecture, and clever sophistry to defend their claim, none as yet have produced solid textual proof from the Bible that clearly, conclusively, iron clad, air tight, and without vagaries and ambiguity, substantiates the position. In other words: the teaching is actually a tradition rather than a fact.

IMHO: It was apparently God's wishes that Jesus Christ be the Son of God and the Son of Man. Had both his parents been human, that would've ruled God out.

I'm guessing that had Jesus gone to the cross as only human, his sacrifice wouldn't have worked. It had to be both God and Man up there.

I'm also guessing that Jesus needed to be both divine and human in order to be an effective mediator between God and Man.

NOTE: The "illusory truth effect" (also known as the validity effect, truth effect and/or the reiteration effect) is the human mind's tendency to believe information to be correct after repeated exposure. This phenomenon was first identified in a 1977 study at Villanova University and Temple University.

In a nutshell: if people are told an unsubstantiated statement often enough by sources they trust; in time their minds will be conditioned to believe the statement is true.
_

So -- what exactly are You saying.

There's really no need To guess about any of this.

Jesus Christ was virgin-conceived because that was God's plan.

And it's not a 'so-called' fallen nature -- it's a fact. It means that mankind has the inborn nature To sin. And Not to be 'good'.

God designed man and woman to be together to produce the next generation. Both egg and ***** are required.

Exactly what teaching is actually a tradition rather than a fact?!

It was God's plan , yes. God being God. He / God / would not be ruled out of anything.

There's no need to be guessing about any of this.

God's Word Also says that '"the man Christ Jesus Did become the mediator between God and man." Because of the cross.

Your last two sentences -- though true -- have no bearing on this subject.

 

[Adziilii]

.
Back in the Old Testament, a curse was leveled upon a really bad king in Solomon's royal line to David's throne that reads like this:

● Jer 22:29-30 . . O land, land, land, hear the word of the Lord! Thus said the Lord: Record this man as without succession, one who shall never be found acceptable; for no man of his offspring shall be accepted to sit on the throne of David and to rule again in Judah.

The bad king's name was Jeconiah (a.k.a. Jehoiakim and/or Coniah). Joseph was one of his descendants. (Matt 1:11)

It's commonly believed that the curse extended to Joseph, so that had he been Jesus' biological father, it would have prevented Christ from ascending David's throne.

However, adopted children inherit from their fathers the same as biological children; so had the curse extended to Joseph, it would have extended to Jesus too whether he was virgin-conceived or not. In other words: seeing as how Jesus got into Solomon's royal line by adoption, then of course he would've got into the curse too because the throne and the curse would've been a package deal.

But the wording "to rule again in Judah" indicates that the curse on Jeconiah's royal progeny was limited to the time of his family's jurisdiction in Judah. So it was in effect only during the days of the divided kingdom with Judah in the south and Samaria in the north. That condition came to an end when Nebuchadnezzar crushed the whole country and led first Samaria, and then later Judah, off to Babylonian slavery.

When Messiah reigns, the country of Israel will be unified. His jurisdiction won't be limited to Judah within a divided kingdom, but will dominate all the land of Israel. So the curse doesn't apply to him.

● Ezek 37:21-22 . .You shall declare to them: Thus said the Lord God: I am going to take the Israelite people from among the nations they have gone to, and gather them from every quarter, and bring them to their own land. I will make them a single nation in the land, on the hills of Israel, and one king shall be king of them all. Never again shall they be two nations, and never again shall they be divided into two kingdoms.
_

 

[Fragrant Grace]

IMHO: It was apparently God's wishes that Jesus Christ be the Son of God and the Son of Man. Had both his parents been human, that would've ruled God out.

I'm guessing that had Jesus gone to the cross as only human, his sacrifice wouldn't have worked. It had to be both God and Man up there.The

I'm also guessing that Jesus needed to be both divine and human in order to be an effective mediator between God and Man.

Good Morning @Adziilii

Im just looking at the way you discuss scripture as in your quote above.

You also quote a lot of other sources.

You are no doubt very intellectual

But may I ask you a question......

Do you know Jesus as your Lord and Saviour......are you saved?

Are we conversing with you as a brother in the Lord......or conversing with an intellectual debator?

This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners
1 Timothy 1:15