edit 89.

edit 90.

Hi b11ng00,

I'm glad you couldn't stay away

I can't answer the question as it stands, because you have two ideas wrapped up in the one question.

Was Jesus raised from the dead? and Is Jesus God?

Firstly, was Jesus raised from the dead?
Yes, Jesus was raised from the dead. The evidence is supported not just by the record of witnesses in the bible (which may be disputed), but also by the evidence of the presence with my spirit of the Holy Spirit that Jesus promised, and did send (which cannot be disputed).

Secondly, was Jesus God?
This is a real doozy! I will have to explain something that I have been truly convinced of first, then I will answer the question.

I have read lots of material relating to the birth of Jesus, and it was never satisfying. You know, "heavenly sperm impregnates young virgin" and such things. This just didn't sound right, and certainly didn't fit what the bible was clearly telling me.

Jesus was of the line of David:
Matt 1:1, 9:27, 20:30, Mark 10:47, 12:35, Luke 6:3, 18:38, Rom 1:3, 2 Tim 2:8, Rev 22:16.

Joseph was of the line of David:
Matt 1:20, Luke 3:23-31,

Jesus was recognised as Joseph's son:
Luke 4:22, John 1:45, 6:42

Children don't just get from their parents a random combination of physical attributes, but also a random combination of spiritual attributes (grandmothers are always pointing these out ).

Now here is my proposition:
If God had never intervened, Jesus would have been born anyway. He would have been physically and spiritually the son of Joseph and Mary, the result of their union. He would have been a great teacher and preacher like his cousin John, but he would not have been the Christ (This is how most non-christians see him). God's intervention allowed the physical attributes of Mary and Joseph to be passed to their son, but not the spiritual attributes. This was done when the Holy Spirit came upon Mary (Luke 1:35 BBE - The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will come to rest on you, and so that which will come to birth will be named holy, Son of God), not in a sexual way, but he was "put together" (Psalm 139:13 BBE - My flesh was made by you, and my parts joined together in my mother’s body). Now, since he did not inherit his parents spiritual nature, but God's, he thus became the sinless son of God, and the unblemmished sacrifice that was needed to satisfy his righteous law. Praise God!

In support of this proposition I cite:

This is intellectually satisfying, because I can now happily visualise Jesus sitting at the right-hand of the father, without the dilemma of imagining, "God is beside himself"

So, to answer the second question: Is Jesus God? I will echo what Paul states. Jesus....

edit 91.

Good points made by all but there are a few that I don't agree with completely.

I believe that Jesus rose from the Dead and ascended to Heaven. My intention is not to argue the point since, so far, we are in agreement but I would like to point out that if Jesus were not resurrected than there is no point in being a Christian.

I also think that He is God and not born of Joseph. The book of John opens with the concept that the “Word”, was the creator of everything and even goes so far as to call him God. It also refers to Him being “with God” which would indicate that the “Word” and the Father are not the same being.

Here in verse 14, we see whom the term “word” is referring to. Who but Jesus fits the description? We also see that he was “begotten of the Father” which may indicate a direct descendant.

Hi Zippy,

We should find another forum for further debate on this, because the mechanics of how, "Jesus and God are one", is of less importance than the fact that they most certainly are. The only point that I would like to make in conclusion here, though, is that every aspect of Jesus that is eternal, is spiritual in nature and not physical. The "house" for his eternal spirit was chosen as the man that would have been the child of Joseph and Mary.

Cheers,
enegue

No-one but God has the spiritual fortitude to declare that one who does or does not accept Jesus as their savior will or will not be saved. What about the people that passed before Jesus was born, are they just screwed? I think not. I believe that God is the nexus of all that is. For arguments sake lets say there is an afterlife that can be either paradise and eternal life, or terror and eternal death. Considering that you all believe that God is benevolent and divine why would he not give man a way to reach eternal paradise without accepting a man, Jesus, as their savior? Before you answer realise that Jesus came into existence long after man. I do not mean to be antagonistic. I grow tired of Christians excluding certain people from paradise and eternal life over some technicallity when said Christians really have no say in the matter.

Hi ice,

Hi Zippy,

I have argued the virgin birth a number of times with those who are antagonistic to God. They say things like, "And what a great God you worship. He gets his kicks inseminating young virgins!" That particular statement challenged me to consider another alternative, one that can be argued simply from scripture, staying true to context.

Every other position leaves unanswered dilemmas - if Mary supplied the female genes for Jesus, where did the male genes come from? I have heard people suggest that it was "heavenly seed", but that just can't be supported by scripture, and only gives the antagonists further ammunition to exercise their grotesque imaginations.

I don't think that I can agrue with you, enegue. I can't say for sure that Jesus' body contained Josephs genetic material but your idea sounds like the type of elegant solution that God might impliment.
This doesn't lessen the need for a direct genetic connection to David through Mary. The point to this is that Jesus was decended from KING David and there is a problem with with Josoph's genealogy when it comes to Jeconiah.

No ZZ, don't do it!