Why do you believe Jesus wasn't made by the seed of Man?

Question

When scriptures proves otherwise,

Romans 1:3-4
3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; 4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

Matthew 1:1-20
1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. 16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

In this generation timeline, Joseph is included as one of the
Fleshly Fathers of Jesus. Scritures below back me. Scriptures do not contradict. People need to get understanding from it.

Isa. 11:1-2, Rev. 22:16, Matt 3:16, John 1:33-34, Acts 13:22-23, Luke 1:31-33, Jeremiah 23:5, Heb 2:16

Common misunderstood scripture is Luke 1:27-37. The bible never says, "IMMACULATE CONCEPTION". Jesus is still the
Son of God, but he is also made from the seed of David.

What is your take on the Seed of David Scrip

You can't deny Romans 1:3-4, it states how Jesus is the Son of David and the Son of God, According to the flesh- seed of David. According to Holiness & Ressurrection Son of God, they should have used this opportunity to say, Son of God because Mary became pregnant not by man but by the Holy Spirit, but it doesn't do that People, it says How he is the Son of God. Clearly, I am not denying Luke 1:35-37, He had the Holy Spirit on him. Show me a scripture that says, How someone is married. "Joseph took Mary his wife. And knew her not she until she brought forth her son." Does that mean he didn't know her before? Does it ever say in the bible that Joseph wasn't Jesus's Father according to the flesh? In the bible, being engaged was binding just as marriage. It was a promise to be a future wife. It is uncomely to be found pregnant before you come together in the public eyes. But to God, if you marry, how is it a sin? Marrying, makes it Good. Only if they don't marry is it sin!

Joseph never said, he to divorce marry. Just put her away privately, until she had her child because it was ashame to be found pregnant before an Official marriage. Read how Issac and Rebecca got married. It was by simply laying down together and being committed. Was that a sin? Just becasue they didn't have a wedding or Just because they didn't sign papers? Gen. 24:51-67 verse 67 says

"And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; " According to the bible if you lay with a woman and make her your wife, it is not a sin. If Joseph, laid down with marry and then made her his wife would that be a sin? The idea that Mary and Joseph would be in sin if they laid together before a formal wedding is not according to the bible. There is so much more that doesn't make sense with "immaculate conception". Like the word virgin, in the hebrew had two different words to describe virgin (almah and Betulah) almah is said to mean "unmarried"

Answer 1

This is very simple, I'm surprised that you don't know this, given that you have referenced the Bible so much.

Mary was also in the lineage of David, and she was the Mother of Jesus. This is why the Bible mentions 'Mary, of whom was born Jesus', rather than just saying 'Joseph who begat Jesus', after the manner for all of the others who WERE begotten by men.

There is no contradiction among these scriptures if you understand that Mary is the one referred to. The seed refers to the woman. This should be obvious to you. For example, in speaking about the coming of the messiah, it is recorded in Genesis 3:15, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

Luke 1:34 - 35 “Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

It is against God’s law to have sex before being married, so Mary would have violated this law if she’d had sex with Joseph, being that at the time of the birth, she was only espoused to Joseph. Read Galatians 4:4 “But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law”

These above verses would create a great contradiction if Jesus were conceived by a human father.

SUCCESS!

Answer 2

First of all, the Immaculate Conception refers to Mary being born without sin, not how Jesus was conceived.

Secondly, if put into context, the author of Matthew is trying to put Jesus in the correct lineage that was expected of the messiah at the time. Obviously there is an apparent contradiction. This needn't cause concern, however. That the Bible can be contradictory is a given -- each author has a different story to tell in their own way to a different audience. Matthew was appealing to the Jewish need for a messiah.

Note, though, that even though the messages may differ in detail, the Bible is still full of spiritual trusims. It can be right in the grand scope and still differ in the details.

This reminds me of a Native American clause sometimes read before a story is told: "This may not be how it happened, but the story itself is true..."

Answer 3

Early Christians adopted the virgin birth story as they were syncretizing Egyptian mythology into Hellenistic Judaism. Part of that included adapting the virgin birth story of Horus (as well as his resurrection).

It's important to keep in mind that Christianity is not single set of beliefs, but rather a collection of sects that exchange ideas sometimes. While the gentile converts were happy to accept Jesus as long as he was viewed as the reincarnated Horus, Jewish converts wanted a Messiah from the line of David. So, you end up with both even though they are incompatible.

The Horus tradition Christians didn't mind if the Jews thought Jesus was the decendant of David, and the Jewish Christians didn't mind if the gentiles thought Jesus was born of a virgin.

The Jewish Christians were better educated and so they wrote down their position, whereas the gentile Christians were much more numerous and their position dominated word of mouth.

The Catholic church continued both traditions, viewing itself as god's authority on earth rather than the Bible like Protestant fundamentalists do.

Both of these traditions continue today, although the trend toward solo scriptura, will eventually view all the oral tradition as heretical no doubt.

Answer 4

by taking a verse here and there from within the written word of God you can pretty much form an opinion- does not mean a lot. I suggest you read the entire story and not just a verse it will make more sense.
If I do the same out of any text book and only base my opinion on a paragraph here and there chances are I will form an opinion that will only leave me guessing and it will contradict it's self.

Answer 5

Jesus was from the house of David and through that linage he was not the son of Joseph did you not read thet part of the bible? the bible totaly states he was born of a virgin by the holy spirit how do you explain this?

Answer 6

First, to the suggesion by one post-er that the virgin birth is of pagan origins -- if you understand the Old Testament stories of miraculous births of promised children (explained below), this is hardly out of keeping with that. In fact, even the ways it differs are appropriate to the unique case of THIS Promise One.

-----------
"Joseph took Mary his wife. And knew her not she until she brought forth her son."

You ask, "Does that mean he didn't know her before?"

Yes, that's precisely what Matthew means! The text of this chapter could not be clearer. Not only that, but the text has just told us that it was BEFORE Joseph 'took Mary' that she was found to be pregnant 'of the Holy Spirit'. The fact that it was NOT by Joseph is further born out in his iniital reaction -- he plans to DIVORCE her privately. The grounds for divorce were infidelity, in that she was betrothed and so bound to HIM (Betrothal was considered a solemn pledge -- that is, the pair was treated as legally 'married' BUT the marriage was not yet consummated [by sexual union].)

Of course, Matthew goes further in telling us that this was a fufilment of Isaiah's word that a VIRGIN would conceive. Though the Hebrew word is ambiguous (and so the full point of the prophecy had not been clear before), the Greek word Matthew uses here is NOT. It meant that she conceived a child WITHOUT having sexual relations.

The words of Gabriel in Luke are also extremely clear. He is explaining to Mary how it is that she, who is a VIRGIN, will bear a child (responding to her question). "The Holy Spirit will come upon YOU [=Mary]" (Yes the Spirit would also be on Jesus, in a very special way, but that's not the point of this particular verse.)

So, whatever you may think about it, Matthew and Luke DO teach the virigin birth of Jesus.

-----------------------

Now the question you raise about how Jesus is "the Seed of David" is an important one. But clearly we must understand in a way that does not deny or dismiss the clear statements of OTHER Scriptures, such as Matthew 1 and Luke 1.

Essentially, Scripture makes it clear that Jesus was LEGALLY of the line of Davd, since he was LEGALLY (even if not genetically) the son of Joseph, a descendant of David. (It is also possible that one of the gospel genealogies is tracing MARY back to David as well.)

Do note that the whole point of Jesus' unique virgin birth is also connected to the idea that he is THE "child of promise". This is a MIRACULOUS birth. As such, it is echoes other important O.T. births (think of Samuel and compare Psalm 113), esp. that of Isaac to Sarah and Abraham when they were past the years of child bearing and (Romans 4 tells us) "as good as dead". (In fact, Romans 4 uses the language both of resurrection and of divine creation --'calling things that are not as though they are' [echoes of Genesis 1, etc].) Galatians 4:22-28 makes a similar point in speaking of Isaac, the child of the promise, as being born not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Now Paul applies that to his readers (fittingly since they are mostly GENTILES, not physical offspring of Abraham). But there is also a connection to JESUS' birth. I believe the point of the birth narratives in the gospels is that Jesus is, LIKE Isaac (and others), miraculously born by God's mighty power. But they are also showing us that he is MORE than Isaac. . . not born to a barren woman, but to one who had never known a man! THIS is like a "new creation". And that is altogether fitting for the One who comes as a NEW/Second Adam.

Answer 7

Wrong.

When He came to earth He was fully man, thus born to Mary and Joseph - in the line of David.


Luke 1:34-35 explains the conception.

Answer 8

The seed of man refers only to the body/flesh of the one that clothed Him - the Son of God. See, the word flesh is prominently used in the scripture?

Answer 9

The word seed refers to the lineage of David, just like you are the seed of your great grandfather. Jesus was born of a Virgin which would assume that you understand that no human seed was involved, it was indeed immaculate conception

Answer 10

Oh yeah - The Mr. Bean Concept - fell from the sky. Virgin Birth

Justin and Constantine did a small mistake - they were too sleepy when they compiled the bible.