Slain from the foundation of the world

[Molly]

He raised Lazarus.

Elijah raised a boy from the dead.

That's not the definition of a quickening spirit, imo.

Being able to give the Holy Spirit to another is a quickening spirit.

[Beloved Servant]

John 10:28; I give them the Life of the Ages, and they shall never, never perish, nor shall any one wrest them from my hand.

Life of the Ages = Zoe

[Molly]

John 10:28; I give them the Life of the Ages, and they shall never, never perish, nor shall any one wrest them from my hand.

Life of the Ages = Zoe

Yes, of course, and he does that doesn't he?

Whoever believes in him will never die.

I'm not arguing with this.

But, if he had never resurrected, I would argue with it.

[micah7:9]

If He had even one ounce of the first Adam's blood coursing through His veins, then He Himself NEEDED A SAVIOUR.

Jesus came as the Head of an entirely new creation. In fact He Himself WAS A NEW CREATURE, different from any that had ever been. I want to make it very plain that Jesus was in no way derived from the First Adam, either by flesh or by blood.

Hear now what Paul says of the Christ: "The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is THE LORD FROM HEAVEN" (I Cor. 15:45-47).

Jesus was not fifty percent the first Adam and fifty percent the last Adam. He was one hundred percent the last Adam!

He was not fifty percent the first man and fifty percent the last man.
He was not fifty percent the man of earth and fifty percent the Lord from heaven.

The second man I-S (100%) THE LORD FROM HEAVEN.
To be the second man and the last Adam He could in no way contain any part of the first Adam.
To be the man from heaven He must not be a descendant of the man of the earth. He must be an entirely NEW KIND OF MAN, separate from every other creation of God, as was the first man Adam in the day when he was created.

The first Adam was truly without father, without mother, and without descent – he was not derived from the life of any other man who had ever lived. So the last Adam!
Though He was conceived IN the womb of Mary, He was not OF Mary.
He was not formed from the union of the sperm of God with the ovum of Mary.
His genes were not half from Mary and half from His heavenly Father.
"That holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called THE SON OF GOD," declared the angel to Mary.
Mary was merely a surrogate mother.
Jesus was as truly man, as truly flesh, as was the first man, but He was also as truly a UNIQUE CREATION OF GOD as was the first man in Eden.

http://www.kingdombiblestudies.org/Echoes/echoes37.htm

If He had even one ounce of the first Adam's blood coursing through His veins, then He Himself NEEDED A SAVIOUR.
:thumbsup:

Debate as you will, the blood of the child comes from the FATHER, yes there is the DNA of both mother and father, but the BLOOD is from the Father. Now, just who is, was, and will be the Father of the Saviour of the World(kosmos, that arranged place) WW is in a true sense correct when he states "surrogate" which it must be. When will man see that JESUS the Christ is the very essence of hands of the potter working with each soul today. All that we, as humans see is Eve, the mother of all living, and without His understanding, given to us, we........ I may never see what Jesus offered and said in John 10:10  "The thief is not coming except that he should be stealing and sacrificing and destroying. I came that they may have life eonian, and have it superabundantly."
This life that is spoken of here has nothing to do with Eve's respirations of breath, life, breathing. We have put to much stock in this "stage" as the poet said, like this is real and that it will continue after we, you and I are gone. Has anyone heard of a new Jerusalem? I am not trying to be synical, but there is in that new Jerusalem a flake of HOPE, which is more than there is in your breathing breath, you soul you.

[WhiteWings]

I think that's what Dave was getting at by "surrogate".   :2c:

HS took the role of Joseph. So I can agree Joseph DNA is not part of Jesus.
But 'disconnecting' Jesus from Mary means He was not even a Jew because a Jew is born form a Jewish mother.

[jabcat]

OK, good point.   (I keep going back and forth on this  :duck:)

You guys figure this out and let me know, will ya?   :)

[WhiteWings]

Debate as you will, the blood of the child comes from the FATHER, yes there is the DNA of both mother and father,

Agreed.

but the BLOOD is from the Father.

And your proof is? You think DNA has no connection whatsoever with blood?

[WhiteWings]

Sounds like he had to be perfected, by resisting sin

Tempted does not mean fallibility.

It does.

He did not resist sin;

He did.

He met it head-on with the Word of God.

True.

[Molly]

I think that's what Dave was getting at by "surrogate".   :2c:

HS took the role of Joseph. So I can agree Joseph DNA is not part of Jesus.
But 'disconnecting' Jesus from Mary means He was not even a Jew because a Jew is born form a Jewish mother.

The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your countrymen, you shall listen to him. This is according to all that you asked of the Lord your God in Horeb on the day of the assembly, saying, "Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, let me not see this great fire anymore, lest I die." And the Lord said to me, "They have spoken well. I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen like you, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. And it shall come about that whoever will not listen to My words which he shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him."
--Deuteronomy 18:15-19


"...feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood" (Acts 20:28).

[WhiteWings]

^YLTJames 1
13 Let no one say, being tempted--`From God I am tempted,' for God is not tempted of evil, and Himself doth tempt no one,
==> God is NOT tempted


^YLTHebrews 2
18 for in that he suffered, himself being tempted, he is able to help those who are tempted.
==> Jesus IS tempted

^YLTHebrews 4
15 for we have not a chief priest unable to sympathise with our infirmities, but one tempted in all things in like manner--apart from sin;
==> Jesus IS tempted. Not just in one thing but in everything. Like other (wo)men.

According to Thayer the Greek for tempted has 2 readings (difference in the manuscripts)

πειράζω
peirazō
Thayer Definition:
1) to try whether a thing can be done
1a) to attempt, endeavour
2) to try, make trial of, test: for the purpose of ascertaining his quantity, or what he thinks, or how he will behave himself
2a) in a good sense
2b) in a bad sense, to test one maliciously, craftily to put to the proof his feelings or judgments
2c) to try or test one's faith, virtue, character, by enticement to sin
2c1) to solicit to sin, to tempt
2c1a) of the temptations of the devil
2d) after the OT usage
2d1) of God: to inflict evils upon one in order to prove his character and the steadfastness of his faith
2d2) men are said to tempt God by exhibitions of distrust, as though they wished to try whether he is not justly distrusted
2d3) by impious or wicked conduct to test God's justice and patience, and to challenge him, as it were to give proof of his perfections.
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer's/Strong's Number: from G3984
Citing in TDNT: 6:23, 822

πειράω
peiraō
Thayer Definition:
1) to make a trial of, to attempt
1a) taught by trial, experienced
2) to test, to make trial of one, put him to proof
2a) his mind, sentiments, temper
2b) in particular, to attempt to induce one to commit some (especially carnal) crime
2c) tempted to sin
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer's/Strong's Number: from G3984
Citing in TDNT: 6:23, 822

πεῖρα
peira
Thayer Definition:
1) a trial, experience, attempt
2) to attempt a thing, to make trial of a thing or of a person
3) to have a trial of a thing
4) to experience, learn to know by experience
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by Thayer's/Strong's Number: from the base of G4008 (through the idea of piercing)
Citing in TDNT: 6:23, 822



I'm aware some say He was indeed tempted but was totally immume to it. He didn't just resist it, it didn't touch Him at all. Just like God.
But the Bible is clear: God can not be tempted but Jesus was tempted in every human aspect.
So imo there must a difference between the not tempting of father and the tempting of Son.

My view is that the greatness of Jesus was not that He was immume to wrong desires; His greatnes was that in whole His life He never gave in to those desires while every other person gives in to those desires on (almost) daily basis.
Thayers defenition if infirmities seems to agree with that.

ἀσθένεια
astheneia
Thayer Definition:
1) want of strength, weakness, infirmity
1a) of the body
1a1) its native weakness and frailty
1a2) feebleness of health or sickness
1b) of the soul
1b1) want of strength and capacity requisite
1b1a) to understand a thing
1b1b) to do things great and glorious
1b1c) to restrain corrupt desires
1b1d) to bear trials and troubles
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by Thayer's/Strong's Number: from G772
Citing in TDNT: 1:490, 83

[thinktank]

Good stuff wings. You made a good point that God cannot be tempted, but Jesus was tempted in every way. That way he gets to experience trials as we go through, so that he can help us better, being made perfect, the captain of our salvation.

[thinktank]

Some points I'd like to make.

I see that a good argument has been made that Jesus could not be born of human blood because it is sin stained.

What I would say, is that what about the premise that, our human blood is stained, but yet not entirely corrupted.

So through Mary's blood, God was able to filter out the contamination and add the influence of the Holy Spirit.

The scriptures say that through Abrahams "seed" all the kindreds of the Earth will be blessed.

So in some sense, there has to be Abraham's seed part of this process - unless one has a compelling argument that Abrahams seed is not Jesus Christ but someone else.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: My  :2c: That He was tempted as we were was plainly shown in the wilderness experience with what He was tempted with. The root of those tempations was, the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life. The way out of the garden is the way (once overcome) back in.

But being in the garden is not the end either, as He showed when He prayed in the garden, "not my will, but Your will be done." Nor is the garden the end of our experience, as He could have avoided the cross when they told Him to get himself down. The end is when He said, "It is finished", and willingly gave up His life, perfecting love. No greater love has any man than this.

I also believe that in His flesh, was no good thing, which is why He said, why callest me good, there is none good but the Father, and that He overcame it BEFORE He ever walked it out for the purpose of having it witnessed and recorded for our benefit. Blessings....

[Beloved Servant]

Sounds like he had to be perfected, by resisting sin

Tempted does not mean fallibility.

It does.

He did not resist sin;

He did.

He met it head-on with the Word of God.

True.

Tempted does not mean fallibility. Period.
tempt
verb \ˈtem(p)t\
Definition of TEMPT
transitive verb
1: to entice to do wrong by promise of pleasure or gain

en·tice/enˈtīs/
Verb: Attract offering pleasure or advantage.

He never took the bait. Period.

Tempted does not mean fallibility. Period.

[Beloved Servant]

He did not resist sin;

He met it head-on with the Word of God.

[Molly]

I think it would be clearer to say that Jesus didn't sin but he could have sinned.

For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet was without sin
--Heb 4:15

[micah7:9]

He did not resist sin;

He met it head-on with the Word of God.

:thumbsup: :HeartThrob: :bigGrin:

[Beloved Servant]

I think it would be clearer to say that Jesus didn't sin but he could have sinned.

For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet was without sin
--Heb 4:15

No, He could not have sinned. He came to do the Fathers Will. He and the Father are One.

Temptation comes from the senses.
Sin never entered His mind.

"You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

Christ said that sin is not defined by just a physical act; if we even allow such a thought to our mind we have sinned.

[micah7:9]

I think it would be clearer to say that Jesus didn't sin but he could have sinned.

For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet was without sin
--Heb 4:15

I, myself can not even reason that," Jesus didn't sin but he could have sinned." I believe it would be clearer to say that Jesus did not sin, Jesus could not sin. It was the Fathers Will for every step and decision that Jesus made.
Joh 5:30  `I am not able of myself to do anything; according as I hear I judge, and my judgment is righteous, because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father who sent me.
Joh 8:28 Jesus, then, said to them again that "Whenever you should be exalting the Son of Mankind, then you will know that I am, and from Myself I am doing nothing, but, according as My Father teaches Me, these things I am speaking."

[Beloved Servant]

:HeartThrob:

Amen.

He is — God with us.

[Molly]

I think it would be clearer to say that Jesus didn't sin but he could have sinned.

For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet was without sin

--Heb 4:15

I, myself can not even reason that," Jesus didn't sin but he could have sinned." I believe it would be clearer to say that Jesus did not sin, Jesus could not sin. It was the Fathers Will for every step and decision that Jesus made.
Joh 5:30  `I am not able of myself to do anything; according as I hear I judge, and my judgment is righteous, because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father who sent me.
Joh 8:28 Jesus, then, said to them again that "Whenever you should be exalting the Son of Mankind, then you will know that I am, and from Myself I am doing nothing, but, according as My Father teaches Me, these things I am speaking."

If he could not sin, then what is the point to come in the likeness of sinful man?

If he could not sin, then how does he condemn sin in the flesh?


14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same;
--Heb 2

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
--Rom 8

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, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.
--Heb 2

[Molly]

:HeartThrob:

Amen.

He is — God with us.

Agree, but walking on the earth in the body of a flesh and blood man.

[thinktank]

I think it would be clearer to say that Jesus didn't sin but he could have sinned.

For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet was without sin
--Heb 4:15

I, myself can not even reason that," Jesus didn't sin but he could have sinned." I believe it would be clearer to say that Jesus did not sin, Jesus could not sin. It was the Fathers Will for every step and decision that Jesus made.
Joh 5:30  `I am not able of myself to do anything; according as I hear I judge, and my judgment is righteous, because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father who sent me.
Joh 8:28 Jesus, then, said to them again that "Whenever you should be exalting the Son of Mankind, then you will know that I am, and from Myself I am doing nothinhttp://www.tentmaker.org/forum/Themes/babylon/images/bbc/bold.gifg, but, according as My Father teaches Me, these things I am speaking."

What about these words in Bold

but, according as My Father teaches Me, these things I am speaking


And

because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father who sent me.


I respect your point of view and after all Jesus did not Sin, but still the scriptures we have discussed show that Jesus was tempted and he said to the disciples,

Mathew 26
52Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

53Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?

[Molly]

53Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?

Imagine the temptation in that! lol

I would have failed that test myself.

[Beloved Servant]

:HeartThrob:

Amen.

He is — God with us.

Agree, but walking on the earth in the body of a flesh and blood man.

Agree, but not Adam's flesh and blood.