hedrick@topaz.ARPA (Chuck Hedrick) (03/31/85)
Dan Boskovich (dan@scgvaxd.UUCP) says: > In order for Christ to be sinless, He first had to be > born without sin. Since the bible teaches that we all inherit sin > from Adam, the virgin birth was imperative! You might want to think a bit more about the implications of this statement. There are a number of theories about what Original Sin means and how it is transmitted. While the Bible is very clear about the concept that we are all involved in sin, it certainly does not say that it is passed on via a gene. The view that you are expressing has a couple of serious implications: 1) that Jesus' human nature is not the same as ours, because his genetic background is different. This would be docetic. I.e. it would imply that Jesus is not really a human being, but a superman. Jesus is supposed to serve as a model of what a true human being is. And in union with him, we are supposed to become like him. If Jesus starts out with a genetic difference that exempts him from sin, then he cannot be a model for what we are to be, and we are physically incapable of following him. 2) that sin is inevitable for men because of some physical imperfection. This would tend to serve as a "cop-out" for people. While it is true that Christianity thinks of human nature as having fallen in Adam, it also thinks of it as having been redeemed with Christ. Take a look at Rom 5 and following. The implication seems to be that Christ is a parallel to Adam. Just as Adam's sin spread through all of humanity, Christ's freedom from sin spread through all of humanity, and freed us from the ill effects of Adam's sin. Unless you think of faith as causing a genetic change, we seem to be dealing at some level other than the physical. In any case, I don't see how the virgin birth could protect Jesus from Original Sin. He still has genetic material from Mary. Either you have to say that Original Sin is only present in males, or you have to assume that some sort of miracle caused Mary to be free of it. The latter position has been adopted by some Catholics. However it seems silly to me. If God is going to free someone of Original Sin by a miracle, it would seem the Jesus himself would be the obvious candidate. Please note that I am not arguing against the virgin birth, and I am not arguing against the idea that Jesus is sinless. I am simply saying that I do not consider the virgin birth to have been the cause of the sinlessness. As a Calvinist, I consider the idea of Original Sin to be extremely important. But I do not want to see it turned into something physical. I believe that the correct view of the virgin birth is that it points up the fact that Jesus' coming was purely an act of God, and was not a decision made by Mary and Joseph. As I understand it, in Biblical times, people believed that the human nature came completely from the egg, and the sperm simply "quickened" it. Thus the Bible and the Church Fathers did not have to worry about giving the misimpression that the virgin birth threatened Jesus' human nature. In the creeds and the writings of the Church Fathers, when someone says that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, they are generally emphasizing his humanity. Now that our knowledge of biochemisty has improved, it is very easy for us to misread what was being said.
dan@scgvaxd.UUCP (Dan Boskovich) (04/03/85)
In article <1078@topaz.ARPA> hedrick@topaz.UUCP (Chuck hedrick) writes: >Dan Boskovich (dan@scgvaxd.UUCP) says: > >> In order for Christ to be sinless, He first had to be >> born without sin. Since the bible teaches that we all inherit sin >> from Adam, the virgin birth was imperative! > >You might want to think a bit more about the implications of this statement. >There are a number of theories about what Original Sin means and how it is >transmitted. While the Bible is very clear about the concept that we are >all involved in sin, it certainly does not say that it is passed on via a >gene. The view that you are expressing has a couple of serious implications: > >Original Sin. He still has genetic material from Mary. Either you have to >say that Original Sin is only present in males, or you have to assume that >some sort of miracle caused Mary to be free of it. The latter position has >been adopted by some Catholics. However it seems silly to me. If God is >going to free someone of Original Sin by a miracle, it would seem the Jesus >himself would be the obvious candidate. > >Please note that I am not arguing against the virgin birth, and I am not >arguing against the idea that Jesus is sinless. I am simply saying that I >do not consider the virgin birth to have been the cause of the sinlessness. >As a Calvinist, I consider the idea of Original Sin to be extremely >important. But I do not want to see it turned into something physical. I >believe that the correct view of the virgin birth is that it points up the >fact that Jesus' coming was purely an act of God, and was not a decision >made by Mary and Joseph. As I understand it, in Biblical times, people >believed that the human nature came completely from the egg, and the sperm >simply "quickened" it. Thus the Bible and the Church Fathers did not have >to worry about giving the misimpression that the virgin birth threatened >Jesus' human nature. In the creeds and the writings of the Church Fathers, >when someone says that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, they are generally >emphasizing his humanity. Now that our knowledge of biochemisty has >improved, it is very easy for us to misread what was being said. What we know of biochemistry and genetics may apply only to the normal physical act of reproduction. Since Christ was conceived of the Holy Spirit, it would seem that God supernaturally protected Jesus from any genetic imperfection. The Christ child was nourished and protected in the womb of Mary, but may not have inherit any of her genes. That could only have happened through the fertilization process of the sperm and egg. Since science has never recorded an incident of a virgin birth conceived by the Holy Spirit, we can never understand its full genetic implications. It would seem that the virgin birth served a definite purpose. This purpose was to bring the God of Heaven down to earth to enter humanity.