Can someone explain to me

[svhorns]

when Jesus Christ went from being a mortal to a divine human being? I understand Jesus was born by a virgin mother... which doesnt really make sense... but the process of artificial inseminiation was very possible... but what made him divine?

[AE 8008]

Jesus was not devine.

he was divine;)

[svhorns]

Jesus was not devine.

he was divine;)

ha... thanks wise one:)

[AE 8008]

ha... thanks wise one:)

ive been doing chemistry for 5 hours, so i dont have the brainpower to have a deep theological discussion...maybe another time soon. until then, you should join us in the He Lurks thread

[the_phoenix612]

when Jesus Christ went from being a mortal to a divine human being? I understand Jesus was born by a virgin mother... which doesnt really make sense... but the process of artificial inseminiation was very possible... but what made him divine?

virgin =/= never had sex.

in that connotation, it means free of the Original Sin.

[lonny23]

when Jesus Christ went from being a mortal to a divine human being? I understand Jesus was born by a virgin mother... which doesnt really make sense... but the process of artificial inseminiation was very possible... but what made him divine?
Jesus was divine in heaven. He became human with flesh through the Virgin Mary. The Bible says the Holy Spirit was upon Mary. The key was to not be born through man because sin has been passed down to each generation through Adam and his descendents.

[the_phoenix612]

Jesus was divine in heaven. He became human with flesh through the Virgin Mary. The Bible says the Holy Spirit was upon Mary. The key was to not be born through man because sin has been passed down to each generation through Adam and his descendents.

or, y'know, none of the above :p

[BleedinBloksDaily]

when u get older jesus is like santa clause u just gotta realize he was never real and never will be

[lonny23]

when u get older jesus is like santa clause u just gotta realize he was never real and never will be
Your location says it all. "In the dark." He does exist.

[the_phoenix612]

Your location says it all. "In the dark." He does exist.

*sigh*

[svhorns]

Jesus was divine in heaven. He became human with flesh through the Virgin Mary. The Bible says the Holy Spirit was upon Mary. The key was to not be born through man because sin has been passed down to each generation through Adam and his descendents.

So Jesus became divine after he was crucified? Which led people to follow his ways after he was dead not while he was alive? or are you saying Jesus was already in heaven?

[BleedinBloksDaily]

Your location says it all. "In the dark." He does exist.

Your so right.PShh

dont forget 2 not leave santa cookies

[Firebird]

SVhorns, you have it going the wrong direction. The traditional Christian teaching is not that a man became divine but rather that the divine became a man. That's why it is called the Incarnation ("in the flesh").

According to orthodox Christian teaching, the Son (the Word of God) always existed and is begotten of the Father and the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity. He is eternally coexistent with the God Father and the Holy Spirit. He took on human form as Jesus and was divine from the moment of his conception.

Phoneix has it all wrong about the Virgin Birth, too. Here is a tip-- don't get your theology from atheists. Mary's pregnancy was a miracle and not achieved through any sort of artificial insemination or sex. In the scriptures Mary is clearly a virgin in the traditional sense, which is why many translations simply say "she had not known a man." She became pregnant by the Holy Spirit and gave birth to the Word of God Incarnate, the 2nd person of the Trinity. During his entire time on earth Jesus was at the same time fully human and fully divine, with both natures coexisting in one person.

In short, Christian teaching is not that Jesus became divine thanks to some special favor from God or through good behavior, but rather that God himself deigned to take on human form and live with us for a while.

Take it or leave it, but that is orthodox Christian teaching.

[DragonWatcher]

Basically and this is a really boiled down explanation God(trinitarian) put himself in the Mary's womb so he would be both human and divine to bridge the sundering that occurred between God and Man at the fall.

Phoenix is pretty off on the virgin thing meaning free from sin. Mary was married so sex for her was a sacrament and very holy thing. God chose a virgin of immense faith to create the extraordinary circumstances for Christ to be born, If your born to a virgin it pretty much differentiates you from everyone else in history.

Sex within the family unit holds a special place within Christianity as especially holy and God's gift to man. One unit becomes three through sex, lots of trinitarian allegories within it etc.

[the_phoenix612]

SVhorns, you have it going the wrong direction. The traditional Christian teaching is not that a man became divine but rather that the divine became a man. That's why it is called the Incarnation ("in the flesh").

According to orthodox Christian teaching, the Son (the Word of God) always existed and is begotten of the Father and the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity. He is eternally coexistent with the God Father and the Holy Spirit. He took on human form as Jesus and was divine from the moment of his conception.

Phoneix has it all wrong about the Virgin Birth, too. Here is a tip-- don't get your theology from atheists. Mary's pregnancy was a miracle and not achieved through any sort of artificial insemination or sex. In the scriptures Mary is clearly a virgin in the traditional sense, which is why many translations simply say "she had not known a man." She became pregnant by the Holy Spirit and gave birth to the Word of God Incarnate, the 2nd person of the Trinity. During his entire time on earth Jesus was at the same time fully human and fully divine, with both natures coexisting in one person.

In short, Christian teaching is not that Jesus became divine thanks to some special favor from God or through good behavior, but rather that God himself deigned to take on human form and live with us for a while.

Take it or leave it, but that is orthodox Christian teaching.

sorry, I approach Biblical tradition from a literary viewpoint.

[Firebird]

sorry, I approach Biblical tradition from a literary viewpoint.

There is no literary viewpoint to suggest that the authors of the Gospels meant anything other than a woman who had not had sex. The wording in the original texts cannot mean anything else. Had they wanted to suggest that she was merely free from sin, they could have expressed that adequately.

[DragonWatcher]

sorry, I approach Biblical tradition from a literary viewpoint.

Just fyi literary interpretation isn't the best way to explain theology. And if you really want to know what your talking about when discussing Christianity I would recommend rereading the NT with a more open view and understanding, just because your posts are pretty far off from understanding most of the true teachings of Christianity. Approach from a skeptical view but without a closed mind. People will be better off with true discourse rather than stereotypes about both atheism and christianity.

[the_phoenix612]

Just fyi literary interpretation isn't the best way to explain theology. And if you really want to know what your talking about when discussing Christianity I would recommend rereading the NT with a more open view and understanding, just because your posts are pretty far off from understanding most of the true teachings of Christianity. Approach from a skeptical view but without a closed mind. People will be better off with true discourse rather than stereotypes about both atheism and christianity.

I was raised Catholic and understand the Bible better than most Christians.

I was merely providing an alternate viewpoint to the meaning of Mary's virginity.

[Firebird]

I was raised Catholic and understand the Bible better than most Christians.

I was merely providing an alternate viewpoint to the meaning of Mary's virginity.

That is not an alternate viewpoint that any serious scholar considers, even unorthodox scholars. Even those scholars who believe that the Virgin Birth is meant as an allegory concede the point that the allegory is about an actual Virgin Birth. Matthew doesn't mince his words when he says that Mary had never known a man.

Finally, the OP is not looking for alternate theories, or asking "what do you think" but rather asking a question about traditional Christian theology. It thus not multiple choice.

[the_phoenix612]

That is not an alternate viewpoint that any serious scholar considers, even unorthodox scholars. Even those scholars who believe that the Virgin Birth is meant as an allegory concede the point that the allegory is about an actual Virgin Birth. Matthew doesn't mince his words when he says that Mary had never known a man.

hey, I'm just throwing out theories I'd heard from decently respectable sources...

like my english professor... :rolleyes:

[Firebird]

hey, I'm just throwing out theories I'd heard from decently respectable sources...

like my english professor... :rolleyes:

I would impressed if he was a Greek or Aramaic professor.:rolleyes:

The English departments of public universities are not exactly bastions of understanding when it comes to Christian thought.

[DragonWatcher]

hey, I'm just throwing out theories I'd heard from decently respectable sources...

like my english professor... :rolleyes:

If there's one thing I've learned in college its always take anything an english professor says with a grain of salt.

[the_phoenix612]

I would impressed if he was a Greek or Aramaic professor.:rolleyes:

The English departments of public universities are not exactly bastions of understanding when it comes to Christian thought.

the point i was trying to make is that there is more than one viewpoint.

even some that come from outside of the christian faith.

this was one of them.

so sue me.

[svhorns]

alright... So people around the Virgin Mary knew she never had sex and they also knew she was pregnant... which is definitely something to freak out about... so basically your saying Jesus was always divine... but he was a mortal for as long as he lived before he was crucified...

I'm acutally more interested in Jesus Christ rather than the religion of Christianity... after Jesus died I'm guessing his buddies were the people to spread the word of Jesus Christ... but what word were they spreading?? and how did a book (the bible) become so large if he only lived for a short period of time?

[DragonWatcher]

the point i was trying to make is that there is more than one viewpoint.

even some that come from outside of the christian faith.

this was one of them.

so sue me.

I can go to a religion professor for a viewpoint on Neitzsche, Doesn't mean its going to be a good one or valid one. One problem with this country is that we assume since everyone is allowed to have a viewpoint all viewpoints are equal which is most certainly not the case.

[Firebird]

the point i was trying to make is that there is more than one viewpoint.

even some that come from outside of the christian faith.

this was one of them.

so sue me.

There are numerous people, Christian and non-Christians alike, all of them experts in ancient languages, who devote their entire lives to studying the Gospels and what they say. None of those people believe that what Matthew and Luke say about Mary can mean anything other than a traditional virgin. As I have said, even those scholars who do not think the Gospels should be taken literally contend that Matthew does not mean that Mary was a virgin.

It's kinda like this....two people reading Aesop's fables, one a literalist and one not. The second person contends that there is a lesson to be learned in the story of the crow, though no crow ever really existed that dropped pebbles in the jug of water. The first contends that there is a lesson to be learned AND the crow really existed. Neither tries to say that the crow in the story is really something else.

Note-- I am not suggesting the Gospels are similar to Aesop's fables.

[DragonWatcher]

alright... So people around the Virgin Mary knew she never had sex and they also knew she was pregnant... which is definitely something to freak out about... so basically your saying Jesus was always divine... but he was a mortal for as long as he lived before he was crucified...

I'm acutally more interested in Jesus Christ rather than the religion of Christianity... after Jesus died I'm guessing his buddies were the people to spread the word of Jesus Christ... but what word were they spreading?? and how did a book (the bible) become so large if he only lived for a short period of time?

Well the four gospels were written to spread the actual teachings of Christ, the rest of the cannon in the bible was written by disciples and those close to early movement of the church. History is full of people who lived for a short while and had immense works of thought attributed to them.

[the_phoenix612]

I can go to a religion professor for a viewpoint on Neitzsche, Doesn't mean its going to be a good one or valid one. One problem with this country is that we assume since everyone is allowed to have a viewpoint all viewpoints are equal which is most certainly not the case.

no, but everyone has a viewpoint, and there are numerous opinions that could be correct, especially dealing with 2000 year old people based on often re-translated texts.

[svhorns]

Well the four gospels were written to spread the actual teachings of Christ, the rest of the cannon in the bible was written by disciples and those close to early movement of the church. History is full of people who lived for a short while and had immense works of thought attributed to them.

but wouldn't it be unofficial so to speak if Jesus Christ himself didn't actually write what was in the bible... I mean the whole religion is based on one man... Jesus Christ... are there actual writings from Jesus himself?

[DragonWatcher]

no, but everyone has a viewpoint, and there are numerous opinions that could be correct, especially dealing with 2000 year old people based on often re-translated texts.

Which is why you shouldn't be asking an english prof, but a greek prof. The english prof is relying solely on that re translated text that often has some errors through translation, as none is perfect if you can't read the original greek.

[the_phoenix612]

Which is why you shouldn't be asking an english prof, but a greek prof. The english prof is relying solely on that re translated text that often has some errors through translation, as none is perfect if you can't read the original greek.

exactly.

the comment she made was on the KJV Bible...

[DragonWatcher]

but wouldn't it be unofficial so to speak if Jesus Christ himself didn't actually write what was in the bible... I mean the whole religion is based on one man... Jesus Christ... are there actual writings from Jesus himself?

Well it is somewhat unofficial if you attribute official as something only Christ himself wrote, which is nothing. Christians however believe that Bible is the divinely inspired work of God, and as such is official. Since the words of the gospels are attributed to the actual words of Christ christians put faith that it is true.

[Firebird]

alright... So people around the Virgin Mary knew she never had sex and they also knew she was pregnant... which is definitely something to freak out about... so basically your saying Jesus was always divine... but he was a mortal for as long as he lived before he was crucified...

I'm acutally more interested in Jesus Christ rather than the religion of Christianity... after Jesus died I'm guessing his buddies were the people to spread the word of Jesus Christ... but what word were they spreading?? and how did a book (the bible) become so large if he only lived for a short period of time?

Really, only Joeseph knew.He didn't trumpet the news from the mountains, as he understood people would think he was crazy. He at first resolved to quietly divorce her, but an angel revealed the truth of the virgin birth. Everyone else (save perhaps Joachim and Anna at the temple) naturally assumed that Jesus was the natural result of Joseph having sex with his bride to be. Joseph then married her and all evidence is that most people considered Jesus the natural son of Joseph. He was mortal in that he could die, but was divine at the same time.

After his death and resurrection, his buddies preached the "word". In part, this was the messages and teachings that Christ himself taught them, but just as important was their witness to the miracle of his death, burial, and subsequent resurrection and ascent into heaven. In short, the "word" they spread was John 3:14, a quote from Jesus himself: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son, that whoever believes in him may not perish, but have eternal life."

How did the Bible get so big-- well, to begin with the vast bulk of the Bible consists of Hebrew Scriptures written long before Jesus' birth, which are part of the Jewish Bible as well.

The 2nd part, the New Testament which is mostly about Jesus is actually very easy to trace the origins of. The Gospels were composed in one of two ways: 1st, they were written by people who were Jesus' buddies (the Apostles) while he was on earth (Matthew and John, maybe Mark). We may assume that what they did not have first hand knowledge of was related to them by either Jesus himself, or other people who knew him well, including Mary, who lived on well after his ascent into heaven. That is how the virgin birth got into the Bible. 2nd, they were written by people who took the time to talk to eyewitnesses of the events they recorded (Luke). Luke himself talks about how he collected all of the information about Jesus and composed a narrative.

The rest of the New Testament is similarly straightforward. The Book of Acts is written by the same Luke who wrote the Gospel. It is a straightforward history of what Jesus buddies did after his ascent into heaven and how the church was founded and began to grow.

Most of the rest of the books are pastoral letters-- written by Paul (who witnessed and spoke to Jesus after the ascent, on the road to Damascus in a vision) and Jesus buddies (Peter, John,etc) to various churches and people. So we actually do know what word they taught, because they wrote it down and sent the letters around. These letters contain practical advice on how to organize churches, as well as theological expositions of who Jesus was and what it all means, and also interpretations of what Jesus meant in all his teachings. Christians generally assume that these authors, who knew Jesus on earth and were specially appointed by him to do his work, are well qualified to do these things.


Finally, the book of Revelation is the recounting of a vision that John (who wrote the Gospel of John and was Jesus' best friend on earth) had shortly before his death. The book of Hebrews is a theologically complex work that was written either by one of Jesus' buddies or another leader in the early church.

[Firebird]

exactly.

the comment she made was on the KJV Bible...

Which is a little like me offering my comments as to what Doestoevsky REALLY meant when he used a certain word in Crime and Punishment while relying soley on the Constance Garnett English Translation. Which would be absolutely stupid.

[the_phoenix612]

Which is a little like me offering my comments as to what Doestoevsky REALLY meant when he used a certain word in Crime and Punishment while relying soley on the Constance Garnett English Translation. Which would be absolutely stupid.

perhaps.

like I have said multiple times now, I was just passing on an interpretation...

[Firebird]

but wouldn't it be unofficial so to speak if Jesus Christ himself didn't actually write what was in the bible... I mean the whole religion is based on one man... Jesus Christ... are there actual writings from Jesus himself?

Not really. We have lots of historical figures that never actually put pen to paper, but we feel like we have a pretty good grasp of who they were and what they thought. Much of what we know about Ancient Greece, for instance, is related through third, fourth, fifth hand accounts.

The Gospels are actually remarkable in that the texts CLAIM to have been written by people who actually witnessed most of the events they wrote about, or at least talked to people who did. What's more, we have more older and extant original sources for them than we do most ancient manuscripts.

And of course, there is the fact that Christians believe that God divinely inspired the authors and protected the texts from serious error. On that you do indeed just have to have faith.

[svhorns]

Not really. We have lots of historical figures that never actually put pen to paper, but we feel like we have a pretty good grasp of who they were and what they thought. Much of what we know about Ancient Greece, for instance, is related through third, fourth, fifth hand accounts.

The Gospels are actually remarkable in that the texts CLAIM to have been written by people who actually witnessed most of the events they wrote about, or at least talked to people who did. What's more, we have more older and extant original sources for them than we do most ancient manuscripts.

And of course, there is the fact that Christians believe that God divinely inspired the authors and protected the texts from serious error. On that you do indeed just have to have faith.

Interesting... thanks for the info... this leads me to my next question... what is a Christian Zionist?

Edit: I heard they had to change the 2012 logo for the london olympics because it was put in order to read Zion...

[DrEdward]

Interesting... thanks for the info... this leads me to my next question... what is a Christian Zionist?

Edit: I heard they had to change the 2012 logo for the london olympics because it was put in order to read Zion...

A Zionist is an individual favoring the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their Biblical homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel. Thus a "Chrsitian Zionist" would be a believer in Christ who also supports such an objective.

[slorch]

virgin =/= never had sex.

in that connotation, it means free of the Original Sin.

the original sin has nothing to do with sex.

it has everything to do with obedience

[slorch]

i was raised catholic and understand the bible less than most christians.

I was merely providing an incorect viewpoint to the meaning of mary's virginity.

fify

[the_phoenix612]

the original sin has nothing to do with sex.

it has everything to do with obedience

why are you awake at 500 in the morning?

[Hoodleboy80]

why are you awake at 500 in the morning?

Who isn't?

[the_phoenix612]

Who isn't?

well i wouldnt be except i cant sleep...

[jakerz]

Basically and this is a really boiled down explanation God(trinitarian) put himself in the Mary's womb so he would be both human and divine to bridge the sundering that occurred between God and Man at the fall.

Phoenix is pretty off on the virgin thing meaning free from sin. Mary was married so sex for her was a sacrament and very holy thing. God chose a virgin of immense faith to create the extraordinary circumstances for Christ to be born, If your born to a virgin it pretty much differentiates you from everyone else in history.

Sex within the family unit holds a special place within Christianity as especially holy and God's gift to man. One unit becomes three through sex, lots of trinitarian allegories within it etc.

Except for the fact that you cannot be born from a virgin.

[jakerz]

Not really. We have lots of historical figures that never actually put pen to paper, but we feel like we have a pretty good grasp of who they were and what they thought. Much of what we know about Ancient Greece, for instance, is related through third, fourth, fifth hand accounts.

The Gospels are actually remarkable in that the texts CLAIM to have been written by people who actually witnessed most of the events they wrote about, or at least talked to people who did. What's more, we have more older and extant original sources for them than we do most ancient manuscripts.

And of course, there is the fact that Christians believe that God divinely inspired the authors and protected the texts from serious error. On that you do indeed just have to have faith.

Firebird says...

Bible and Greek Mythology are ********!

[jakerz]

Christianity is as big as it is today because of

Civil order
Paul (propagandist)
Other dying religions around start of Christianity


And from there it's history.

[the_phoenix612]

Except for the fact that you cannot be born from a virgin.

shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

its MAGICKS!

[The King]

If there's one thing I've learned in college its always take anything an english professor says with a grain of salt.

No Kidding

[RedRage00]

I slept with my English professor. :ninja:

[DrEdward]

I slept with my English professor. :ninja:

I must admit, that struck me as a pretty funny one liner this evening. :D

[LUFPAN]

I know this won't really answer the question but....

Yesterday morning I received a call that a dear friend of mine had a wreck and flipped her car multiple times. While the car was rolling one of her daughters was thrown out of the sun roof and her son was thrown through the windshield of the car. Five people were in this car and all of them walked away from this accident, including those who were thrown.

I don't pretend to know the answer to every thing that is happening in the universe nor can I explain all of life's mysteries. But I can say that when I see miracles like the one that saved my friends yesterday I know without a doubt that there is a God. No amount of theory or philosophy will ever convince me of anything else.

Thank you God for saving my friends.
Truly I'm :notworthy:notworthy:notworthy

[4th and 1]

SVhorns, you have it going the wrong direction. The traditional Christian teaching is not that a man became divine but rather that the divine became a man. That's why it is called the Incarnation ("in the flesh").

According to orthodox Christian teaching, the Son (the Word of God) always existed and is begotten of the Father and the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity. He is eternally coexistent with the God Father and the Holy Spirit. He took on human form as Jesus and was divine from the moment of his conception.

Phoneix has it all wrong about the Virgin Birth, too. Here is a tip-- don't get your theology from atheists. Mary's pregnancy was a miracle and not achieved through any sort of artificial insemination or sex. In the scriptures Mary is clearly a virgin in the traditional sense, which is why many translations simply say "she had not known a man." She became pregnant by the Holy Spirit and gave birth to the Word of God Incarnate, the 2nd person of the Trinity. During his entire time on earth Jesus was at the same time fully human and fully divine, with both natures coexisting in one person.

In short, Christian teaching is not that Jesus became divine thanks to some special favor from God or through good behavior, but rather that God himself deigned to take on human form and live with us for a while.

Take it or leave it, but that is orthodox Christian teaching.

I agree with you 100% Firebird. I'd like to mention why Mary was chosen. The scriptures tell us that the Messiah would be born of a virgin and would come from the line of Abraham. The genealogy of Jesus Christ found in the 1st chapter of Matthew satisfies this prophecy.