Why did our Redeemer need to be both God and Man?

[rebuilder 454]

No, the very act of Logos becoming flesh is NOT God becoming sins flesh which is impossible! But God revealing Himself through that Flesh.

More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. Romans 5:1

But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Corinth 15:57

I just realized it's actually useless quoting Scripture to you asoul!

You believe the Father is God, Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God. But this is not enough to prove Trinitarianism. You also need to prove that the reverse is true: ie. that God is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. You must prove that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are united in substance as three persons comprising one being Who is God. All of this must be achieved using exclusively Biblical concepts derived solely from Scripture.

I know that you know you can't do this...so where does that place you?

Go into Scripture (not creeds) and search how God was in Christ reconciling the World to Himself.

Once you have done this...inform me how we as Sons of God do likewise (how God manifests His will through us!)



For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity. Eccles 3:19

This truth is the basis of every Scripture concerning the fate of man and beast.

F2F

Is Jesus created, or the creator?

 

[face2face]

Is Jesus created

Correct if "was"

 

[face2face]

If I'm the one who doesn't have a clear understanding of Rom. 8:3, then prove it by explaining how Jesus could've been sinful, and how God the Father could've condemned sin in Him, when Jesus is without sin. (1 Jn. 3:5)

You have asked a very good question - this is the mystery which has been revealed

How did God condemn sin in his son's nature?

You will need other Scriptures to piece this together

F2F

 

[Johann]

If I'm the one who doesn't have a clear understanding of Rom. 8:3, then prove it by explaining how Jesus could've been sinful, and how God the Father could've condemned sin in Him, when Jesus is without sin. (1 Jn. 3:5)

Romans 8:3 (NKJV):
"For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh..."

To clarify, the verse states that Jesus was sent "in the likeness of sinful flesh," not that Jesus was sinful. The term "likeness" (Greek: ὁμοίωμα, homoiōma) here is crucial because it indicates that while Jesus took on human flesh, He did so in a way that resembled sinful human nature without actually becoming sinful Himself.

Understanding the Phrase "Likeness of Sinful Flesh"
The phrase points to Jesus' full humanity. He took on human flesh, which in every other case has been affected by sin since the fall of Adam. But Jesus' incarnation was unique because:

He was fully human: Jesus experienced the same frailties, limitations, and temptations of human life (Hebrews 4:15) but without the moral corruption of sin.

He was without sin: , 1 John 3:5 clearly states that Jesus "in Him there is no sin." Similarly, 2 Corinthians 5:21 says that "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us."

How Did God Condemn Sin in Jesus' Flesh?
In Romans 8:3, the statement "He condemned sin in the flesh" means that God dealt with the problem of sin through the sacrificial death of Christ in His human body. God judged and punished sin—not by making Jesus sinful—but by allowing Jesus to bear the penalty of sin for humanity:

Christ's Sacrifice: Jesus took on the penalty of sin on behalf of sinful humanity (Isaiah 53:5-6, 1 Peter 2:24). His death satisfied the demands of God’s justice because the sin that was condemned was not His own, but ours.

Substitutionary Atonement: Through His perfect, sinless life, Christ became the substitute for sinners. He bore our sins (1 Peter 2:24) and took the condemnation we deserved. The flesh (human nature) of Jesus became the place where God dealt with sin, but Jesus Himself remained sinless.


Jesus was not sinful, nor did He become sinful at any point. God condemned sin through Jesus’ sinless life and sacrificial death, but the sin He condemned was ours, which Christ bore in His flesh. This is how Romans 8:3 maintains the perfect sinlessness of Jesus while explaining how God could justly deal with sin in His flesh, fulfilling the law’s requirements and allowing believers to be set free from sin and death (Romans 8:1-2).
How Did God Condemn Sin in Christ’s Flesh?
Substitutionary Sacrifice: Jesus, being fully human, took on human flesh, yet He was without sin (Hebrews 4:15). God’s justice required that the penalty for sin—death—be paid, and Jesus, though sinless, willingly became the substitute for sinners. In this way, God could justly deal with sin by punishing it in the body of Jesus, though the sin was ours, not His.

Isaiah 53:5: “But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.”
2 Corinthians 5:21: “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”

The Flesh as the Arena for Sin’s Defeat: Sin entered the world through human flesh (Adam's disobedience), and it is in the flesh of Jesus, fully human yet sinless, that sin was ultimately condemned and defeated. Through His death on the cross, Jesus absorbed the judgment that was due to sinners, even though He Himself was without sin. His sinless human nature became the vessel through which God executed His righteous judgment on sin.

Romans 8:3 uses "flesh" to refer to Jesus' human nature, where God condemned sin. This means that Jesus' body was the instrument of atonement, not that Jesus had sin in His flesh. The "flesh" here simply refers to His humanity, not any inherent sinfulness.

So What Does "Condemned Sin in the Flesh" Mean?
It means that God, in His justice, executed the penalty for sin through the sacrificial death of His sinless Son, Jesus. Though Jesus Himself was sinless, He bore the judgment for sin on behalf of sinful humanity. This is not about Jesus being sinful, but about God punishing sin through the sacrifice of the one who was sinless, thereby fulfilling the requirements of the law and setting us free from its condemnation.


God didn’t condemn Jesus as sinful; rather, He condemned sin itself by placing its penalty on Jesus, who bore that penalty in His flesh (His human nature). Jesus remained perfectly sinless, and His body became the means through which God’s justice was satisfied, as He became the substitute for our sins. Therefore, the phrase "justly deal with sin in Jesus' flesh" means that God executed the penalty for sin on Christ's sinless humanity, securing redemption for those who believe.


Correct?

J.

 

[RedFan]

His death satisfied the demands of God’s justice because the sin that was condemned was not His own, but ours.

That's the party line, of course. But good luck squaring that "justice" -- punishing the sinless in place of the guilty -- with any conception of justice known to man.

 

[MatthewG]

It was the only was to restore balance lost by Adam and recover fallen mankind. After 1500 years of failure by his own people. Therefore God sent his Word, Yeshua, Emmanuel.

 

[LuxMundy]

You have asked a very good question - this is the mystery which has been revealed

How did God condemn sin in his son's nature?

You will need other Scriptures to piece this together

F2F

That's not my question, but rather I asked you to reconcile your interpretation of Rom. 8:3 with 1 Jn. 3:5 that says Jesus is without sin.

 

[face2face]

That's not my question, but rather I asked you to reconcile your interpretation of Rom. 8:3 with 1 Jn. 3:5 that says Jesus is without sin.

Let's rephrase that then!
You have led yourself to a good request.
You can see God condemned sin specifically in the nature of his son.
Are you able to understand how?

The Apostles understood this subject intimately and you do not...this must be a concern for you, right?

F2F

 

[LuxMundy]

Let's rephrase that then!
You have led yourself to a good request.

Now acquiesce to my request by reconciling your interpretation of Rom. 8:3, which is that Jesus was sinful, and that God the Father condemned sin in Him, with 1 Jn. 3:5 that says Jesus is without sin.

 

[face2face]

Now acquiesce to my request by reconciling your interpretation of Rom. 8:3, which is that Jesus was sinful, and that God the Father condemned sin in Him, with 1 Jn. 3:5 that says Jesus is without sin.

Clearly Romans 8:1-3 now challenges your view of John 1:1, as it should.

Let me take you to another text to see how you go with Paul's Gospel.

God made the one who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that in him we would become the righteousness of God. 2 Co 5:20–21.

In what way did God make Jesus who knew no sin "to be sin" for us?

Note the flow of thought:

-God made
-Sinless son to be sin (FOR US!)

In what way could Paul say Jesus was made sin for us.

I'm not sure how interested you are in discovering the true Jesus - you might be happy dwelling in ignorance, and if you are I can stop anytime. Let me know!

F2F

 

[LuxMundy]

Clearly Romans 8:1-3 now challenges your view of John 1:1, as it should.

I'm challenging you to defend your interpretation of Rom. 8:3, which is that Jesus is sinful, and that God condemned sin in Him, by explaining how could Jesus commit sins, and be condemned for them, when 1 Jn. 3:5 says that He is without sin?

 

[face2face]

I'm challenging you to defend your interpretation of Rom. 8:3, which is that Jesus is sinful, and that God condemned sin in Him, by explaining how could Jesus commit sins, and be condemned for them, when 1 Jn. 3:5 says that Jesus is without sin?

Just to be clear, so there is no ambiguity...can you go back and show me where I said "Jesus was sinful".

If you are unable to use Apostolic language what hope is there for you to learn the original Gospel?

If you are unble to be honest with me, or the Word, what point is there in this discussion?

I've shown you two verses (now) which don't fit into your theological understanding.

John 1:1; Romans 8:1-3 and 2 Corinthians 5:20-21 fit perfectly into the original Gospel.

F2F

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Why?

many reasons.

1. no mere human could pay for the sin of all mankind
2. God took account himself. He did not create someone to punish on our behalf, He came himself which shut down satans lie against him, and proved his true love (no greater love)

are but two. and more than enough reasons

 

[face2face]

Why?

many reasons.

1. no mere human could pay for the sin of all mankind
2. God took account himself. He did not create someone to punish on our behalf, He came himself which shut down satans lie against him, and proved his true love (no greater love)

are but two. and more than enough reasons

Eternally

I've held many chats with you about these principles and unfortunately you have not shown the Scriptural integrity required to hold a meaningful discussion. You have shown so many times you project your own beliefs onto the Word and rarely are your points well supported with Scripture.

F2F

 

[rebuilder 454]

Correct if "was"

So you are watchtower?
Some other affiliation?

 

[face2face]

So you are watchtower?
Some other affiliation?

Not sure if you are following the thread? Happy for you to engage with the 2xquotes that currently stand against asouls understanding of the true nature of Christ.

F2F

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Why did our Redeemer need to be both God and Man?

"Blessed are you among all women" (Lk. 1:42)

This blessing, which we say poorly or do not say at all, to Her Who with Her sacrifice began the Redemption, continually resounds in Heaven, pronounced with infinite love by the Trinity, with inflamed charity by those saved by their sacrifice, and by the angelic choirs. All paradise blesses Mary, the masterwork of universal Creation and Divine Mercy.

Even if all the Father's work to create the Earth from nothing had served only to receive Mary, the work of Creation would have had its reason for being, for the perfection of this Creature is such that it is testimony not only of the wisdom and power, but also of the love with which God created the world.

Since the earthly creation has instead yielded Adam and Adam's race, Mary witnesses to the merciful superlove of God towards man, for through Mary, Mother of the Redeemer, God has worked the salvation of the human race. Jesus is the Christ because Mary conceived Him and gave Him to the World.

Some will say that as God Jesus could have overcome the need to take flesh in a woman's womb. He could do all, it's true. But reflect on the law of order and goodness which lies in His annihilation in mortal clothing.

The sin committed by man had to be expiated by man and not by the non-incarnate divinity. How could the Divinity, incorporeal Spirit, redeem the sins of the flesh with the sacrifice of Itself? It was, then, necessary that God should pay for the sins of flesh and blood with the agony of an innocent Flesh and Blood, born of an innocent woman.

His mind, His feeling, and His Spirit would have suffered for our sins in mind, feeling, and spirit. But to be the Redemption of all forms of concupiscence inoculated into Adam and his descendants by the Tempter, the One Immolated for them all had to be endowed with a nature like ours, made worthy of being given as a ransom to God by the Divinity hidden in it, like a gem of infinite supernatural value hidden under common, natural clothing.

God is order, and God does not violate or do violence to order, except in very exceptional cases, judged useful by His intelligence. Such was not the case with His Redemption.

He had not only to cancel sin from the moment it occurred until the moment of the sacrifice and annul in those to come the effects of sin by having them be born unaware of evil. No. With a total sacrifice He had to make reparation for Sin and all the sins of all mankind, give the men already dead absolution of sin, and give those living at that time and in the future the means to be helped to resist evil and to be forgiven for the evil which their weakness would lead them to do.

His sacrifice thus had to be such as to present all the necessary requisites, and it could be such only in a God made man: a host worthy of God, a means understood by man. In addition, He was coming to bring the Law.

If His humanity had not existed, how could we—His poor brothers and sisters, who labor to have faith in Him, who lived for thirty-three years on the earth, a Man among men—have believed? And, how could He appear, already an adult, to hostile or ignorant peoples, making them convinced of His nature and His doctrine? He would then have appeared, in the eyes of the world, as a spirit Who had taken on a human likeness, but not as a man who was born and died, shedding real blood through the wounds of a real flesh—as proof of being a man—and rose again and ascended to Heaven with His glorified body—as proof of being God returning to His eternal dwelling.

Isn't it sweeter for us to think that He is really our brother, with the destiny of creatures who are born, live, suffer, and die, than to conceive of Him as a spirit superior to the exigencies of humanity?

It was necessary, then, for a woman to give birth to Him according to the flesh, after having conceived Him above the flesh, for from no marriage of creatures, no matter how holy they were, could the God-Man be conceived, but only from a wedding of Purity and Love, the Spirit and the Virgin, created without stain so as to be the matrix for the flesh of a God, the Virgin the thought of Whom was God's joy, since before time existed, the Virgin in Whom there is a compendium of the Fathers creative perfection, the joy of Heaven, the salvation of the Earth, the most beautiful flower of Creation of all the flowers of the Universe, a living star before whom all the suns created by the Father seem dull.

Blessed is the Pure One, destined for the Lord.
Blessed is the One Desired by the Trinity, which by desire anticipated the instant of fusing Itself with Her in an embrace of three-fold love.
Blessed is the Victorious Woman who crushes the Tempter under the witness of Her immaculate nature.
Blessed is the Virgin Who knows only the Lord's kiss.
Blessed is the Mother Who has become such out of holy obedience to the will of the Most High.
Blessed is the Martyr Who accepts martyrdom out of mercy on all of us.
Blessed is the Redemptrix of woman and of all the children of woman, Who cancels out Eve and is installed in her place to bear the fruit of life where the Enemy has set the seed of death.

Blessed, blessed, thrice blessed for your "yes," O Mother of Jesus, Who have allowed God to keep the promise made to Abraham, the patriarchs, and the prophets, Who have brought relief to Love, oppressed by having to be the punisher and not the savior, Who have released the Earth from the condemnation brought upon it by Eve.

Blessed, blessed, blessed for Your holy humility, for Your inflamed charity, for Your untouched virginity, for Your divine maternity, multiple, sempiternal, true, and spiritual, Mother Who with Your love and with Your pain give birth continuously to children for the Kingdom of Your Jesus.

Generatrix of grace and salvation, generatrix of divine Mercy, generatrix of the universal Church, may You be blessed eternally for what You have done, as You were eternally blessed for what You would do.

Holy, holy, holy Priestess, Who celebrated the first sacrifice and with part of Yourself prepared the Host to be immolated on the altar of the world.

Holy, holy, holy Mother of Jesus, Who did not cause Him to miss Heaven and the Father's breast, for in You He found another paradise not unlike the one in which the Triad performs Its divine works; Mary, Who are the glory of the Father and the Love of the Spirit."

"Blessed" is really translated, happy. When we are blessed by God, He provides something for us that makes us happy, whether it is love, our salvation, a husband, a wife, children, provisions, talents, gifts, health, security, protection, it makes us happy, joyful. Mary was blessed like no other woman in that she was chosen to bare the Son of God. Do you get that ... the Son of God (that is not Mary, that is the Father God). Now Jesus is also referred to as the Son of Man and it is in this form Mary was His mother.
Jesus, while in his physical human form, had a biological mother. But His spirit has no mother; since Jesus is God, he always existed. There is no mother of God, that would imply that the sexual union between a man and a woman was involved. Mary did not give birth to God, she gave birth to a human baby ( whom God's spirit occupied. God emptied Himself into a human vessel. Mary had nothing to do with this spiritual conception, he womb contained the physical person. Therefore the "Mother of God" is a misnomer.

Likely all that was a waist of time, Catholics just can't see it this way. Although I was a Catholic ... had my communion and confirmation as a young boy - who didn't really get it. 24 years later, I got it.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

and not by the non-incarnate divinity. How could the Divinity, incorporeal Spirit, redeem the sins of the flesh with the sacrifice of Itself? It was, then, necessary that God should pay for the sins of flesh and blood with the agony of an innocent Flesh and Blood, born of an innocent woman.

To me He had to man and that which come down from heaven given of God because “we have this treasure in a weak vessel so the power be of God and not of men.” It says he was crucified in weakness but lives by the Spirit of God.
2 Corinthians 13:4 For though he was crucified through weakness, yet he lives by the power of God. For we also are weak in him, but we shall live with him by the power of God toward you.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Eternally

I've held many chats with you about these principles and unfortunately you have not shown the Scriptural integrity required to hold a meaningful discussion. You have shown so many times you project your own beliefs onto the Word and rarely are your points well supported with Scripture.

F2F

F2F

You did not prove me wrong. and this response to my post is nonsensical. But it goes to show how you work. You can not answer a persons response to you or anyone else. so you just make a silly remark like this.\

either show me what I said is wrong. or back out slowly. because you are just hurting yourself

 

[LuxMundy]

Just to be clear, so there is no ambiguity...can you go back and show me where I said "Jesus was sinful".

To preface, in post #33, you said, "No, the very act of Logos becoming flesh is NOT God becoming sins flesh which is impossible!" In other words, despite your having called Jesus a man, or human earlier, you were denying that the Word became incarnate, or human, because you associate being human to being sinful.

In post #34 and #38, I replied to that saying, "You said the Word becoming flesh isn't God becoming "sins flesh", but I didn't say the Word became a sinful human."

and

"The Koine Greek word for "flesh" is "σάρξ" (sarx), and one of its definitions is "flesh, body, the soft tissue of a creature, often in contrast to bone, ligament, or sinew", such as that of a human. In Jn. 1:1;14, we read, "The Word was God", and "the Word was made flesh (human, or man), and lived among us [...]." You even acknowledged that Jesus is human, a man, back in post #18. The very act of something fleshless becoming flesh, e.g., human, or man, is an incarnation. Unlike other humans, Jesus, the Word Incarnate, is a human, or man, Who is without sin. (1 Jn. 3:5)"

In post #37, you replied to that saying,

"By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and concerning sin, he (God) condemned sin in the flesh (Jesus), Romans 8:1-3

Explain how God condemned sin in the body and nature of Christ?"

Just like Jn. 1:1, Rom. 8:3 is another way of saying that the Word became incarnate, or human: Jesus, but you cited the latter as if it shows that the Word didn't become incarnate, or human, and said that God condemned sin "in the body and nature (character) of Christ" Himself. However, Jesus wasn't sinful in body and character (1 Jn. 3:5), which is why I asked you to reconcile that verse with your interpretation of Rom. 8:3. Was it not your intention to convey that?