# Jesus and the Virgin Birth - Profound thought...



## just_grace (Aug 24, 2005)

Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit, was He connected to Mary by an umbilical cord, did Mary's blood run through Christ or was He miraculously sustained throughout pregnancy by the power of God?

Always intrigued me this question has but never asked it!

David

[Edited on 8-27-2005 by webmaster]


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Aug 24, 2005)

In order for him to have the line of David in Him he was human child in Mary. 

Blade


----------



## andreas (Aug 24, 2005)

**Always intrigued me this question has but never asked it!**


"As thou knowest not "¦ how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh all." Ecclesiastes 11:5,

andreas.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Aug 25, 2005)

Fully God. Fully man.


----------



## BrianBowman (Aug 25, 2005)

It is a medical fact that the blood of the mother does not come into contact with the blood flowing in her unborn child. Because Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit the corrupt "seed of Adam" was not imparted to Him.


----------



## just_grace (Aug 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by BrianBowman_
> It is a medical fact that the blood of the mother does not come into contact with the blood flowing in her unborn child. Because Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit the corrupt "seed of Adam" was not imparted to Him.



Thats the answer I am looking for.

Thanks.


----------



## Arch2k (Aug 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by BrianBowman_
> It is a medical fact that the blood of the mother does not come into contact with the blood flowing in her unborn child. Because Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit the corrupt "seed of Adam" was not imparted to Him.



Very interesting.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Aug 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by BrianBowman_
> It is a medical fact that the blood of the mother does not come into contact with the blood flowing in her unborn child. Because Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit the corrupt "seed of Adam" was not imparted to Him.



How can this be? The blood that flows through the cord is where the child gets his or her nutrition. The childs body has to be connected to it somehow. 
Brian,
If you could back this fact up I would appreciate seeing it. Thanks.


----------



## Augusta (Aug 25, 2005)

I know that women with RH negative blood type and an RH positive blood type child have to worry about their blood mixing because if it does mix one set of antibodies will attack the other and you can lose the baby. So just by logical implication the blood does not mix. 


http://www.babycenter.com/expert/pregnancy/prenatalhealth/2709.html


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Aug 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Augusta_
> I know that women with RH negative blood type and an RH positive blood type child have to worry about their blood mixing because if it does mix one set of antibodies will attack the other and you can lose the baby. So just by logical implication the blood does not mix.
> 
> 
> http://www.babycenter.com/expert/pregnancy/prenatalhealth/2709.html



Interesting.... but how is this done? Who's blood is in the cord and how is it not mixed? Inquiring minds must know.


----------



## Augusta (Aug 25, 2005)

Calling all doctors!! Oh wait a minute....calling all medical doctors!!


----------



## gwine (Aug 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by BrianBowman_
> It is a medical fact that the blood of the mother does not come into contact with the blood flowing in her unborn child. Because Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit the corrupt "seed of Adam" was not imparted to Him.



Ignoring this fact you still need to deal with the woman's egg as part of the deal. Would not half of Christ's genetic makeup be from Mary, a member of humanity?


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by BrianBowman_
> ...



This does not necessarily have to be true. Supernaturally Christ was placed within the womb of Mary. The genetic strand was of God. In the same way Christ was sinless in life, He was as well sinless in the womb.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Augusta_
> Calling all doctors!! Oh wait a minute....calling all medical doctors!!






Submitted by Mark, a graduate student from New Zealand 

At what stage, if any, do a mother and fetus share a circulatory system? In particular, can a mother's B lymphocytes be transferred to the fetus?



Provided by Dennis Chang, HHMI predoctoral fellow, Harvard University 

In mammals, the developing fetus and its mother share a very intimate relationship. The mother's body supplies the fetus with oxygen, nutrients, and antibodies, removes the fetus's carbon dioxide and other metabolic waste materials, and helps regulate fetal growth and physiology by circulating hormones. The fetus produces hormones that help bring about changes in the mother's body to maintain the pregnancy.

Although there is considerable exchange of materials, the fetus remains largely separated from the mother's tissues. The fetus is inside the mother's uterus but never directly touches the uterine walls. Two membranes"”the chorion and the amnion"”surround the fetus, and the inner space is filled with amniotic fluid. Only a thin tube of tissue (the umbilical cord) penetrates these membranes to connect the fetus and the mother. Physiological exchange between mother and fetus occurs only at the interface where the umbilical cord fuses with the uterine walls. This interface, where fetal tissues and maternal tissues interact, is called the placenta.

In the fully developed placenta, fetal-derived tissue (specifically, part of the chorion) forms fingerlike growths (villi) that enter and intermingle with the surface layer (endometrium) of the uterus. The fetal circulation extends down the umbilical cord and branches into capillaries inside these villi. The villi are surrounded by a network of intervillous spaces, and the mother's endometrial arteries fill these spaces with blood. Endometrial veins remove the blood from these spaces. As a result, maternal blood continuously flows around the villi. The villi are the sites for exchanging materials between the fetal and maternal circulatory systems.

The mother's circulatory system is not continuous with the fetus's. Blood does not normally flow from the mother to the fetus and back; only materials carried in the blood are exchanged. Therefore, maternal blood cells such as B lymphocytes are not normally transferred to the fetus, although the antibodies produced by B lymphocytes do cross the placenta.

This separation of circulatory systems is very important for immunological reasons. Half the fetus's genes come from the mother and half from the father. The father's genes are "foreign" to the mother. The difference is potentially enough to trigger an immune response. The separation of the mother's and fetus's tissues and blood reduces the likelihood that the maternal immune cells will encounter fetal cells and launch an attack against the fetus. What about the placenta itself? Although white blood cells such as T lymphocytes and natural killer cells are plentiful in the endometrium, they do not react against the villi of the fetal chorion. The reason for this is not completely known, but it appears that proteins on the surface of the villi keep them safe.

B lymphocytes do not reside in the endometrium and are unlikely to cross the placenta and enter the fetal circulatory system. They may, however, do so on rare occasions. Sometimes the placental barrier springs microscopic leaks.

It is known that fetal cells occasionally enter the maternal circulatory system, because the result is a documented medical tragedy. In cases where the fetus has the red blood cell D antigen of the Rh group (that is, the fetus is Rh positive) and the mother does not (that is, she is Rh negative), the entry of fetal blood cells into the mother's blood will cause an immune response against the antigen. The mother will produce antibodies against the D antigen, and these will cross the placenta and start destroying the fetal red blood cells, a condition called hemolytic disease of the newborn. Because of advances in medical knowledge and diagnostic tools, this condition is largely preventable and curable.

The transfer of blood cells in the other direction"”from mother to fetus"”does not have the same effect, because the fetal immune system is not fully developed and cannot respond to any foreign antigens carried by maternal cells. In addition, the few maternal blood cells that may leak through the placenta to the fetus are not enough to launch an immune response against fetal antigens. We therefore do not have evidence"”for example, an immune response by the fetus"”showing that maternal cells can cross the placenta. Since fetal cells can do so on occasion, however, it seems likely that maternal blood cells, such as B lymphocytes, can as well, although this is not the normal situation.

To read more about fetal development and maternal-fetal interactions, see a human embryology textbook. I recommend the following:

O'Rahilly, R., and F. Muller. Human Embryology and Teratology. 2d ed. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996.

Moore, K.L., and T.V.N. Persaud. Before We Are Born. 5th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1998.



[Edited on 8-25-2005 by Scott Bushey]


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by gwine_
> ...



I respectfully disagree, Scott.

Jesus HAD to be genetically related to Mary, and thus to David, and thus to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Otherwise, He cannot be our Saviour.

I'm not uptight about Jesus being conceived with Mary's egg cell. With all of the "seed" terminology throughout Scripture, I tend to think the sin nature itself is transmitted via the sperm cell, anyway. But it is through the "seed of the woman" (cf. Gen. 3:15) that Messiah would come.

I am not saying that women are without sin (or Mary in particular). I'm just suggesting that the egg cell itself doesn't transmit the sin nature. The sperm cell does that.

It's just a hypothesis, but hey, it works for me.


----------



## Augusta (Aug 25, 2005)

Wasn't there something about the Jewish line following the mother? I noticed in the books of Kings and in the books of Chronicles the names of the mothers of certain Kings start being specifically mentioned. I also remember hearing this but not undertanding the significance.


----------



## gwine (Aug 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by gwine_
> ...



Then how could you ever say that Jesus was fully man and fully God if his human side didn't come from human DNA? If you say that God made the DNA (and I know that God makes everything) then all you have is God emerging from Mary's womb.


----------



## just_grace (Aug 25, 2005)

*Taking every thought captive...*

I have to stop thinking...

Wish I was there at the birth.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Aug 25, 2005)

What a cool discussion. Thanks for the reply on how it works Scott.


----------



## BrianBowman (Aug 26, 2005)

> _Originally posted by puritancovenanter_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by BrianBowman_
> ...



Thanks for the question Randy. I believe that Scot's excellent reference to Dennis Chang's article answers this. I'm *not* a Medical Doctor and consequently did not comment on the intricacies of the placenta as the system for providing nutrution to and removing waste from the growing pre-born child, or that specific complications in the pregnancy can result in the mother's blood cells entering her child's blood stream.

Thanks to everyone else for the hard facts!


----------



## BrianBowman (Aug 26, 2005)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> ...



Although His "genetic strand was of God" through the miraculous conception by the Holy Spirit (which we believe by a faith produced by the Holy Spirit in the veracity of what the Holy Scriptures teach us), Jesus Christ was a man, both fully flesh-and-blood and fully Divine. In my experience, even with the illumination of the Holy Spirit, there remain a strong element of mystery in this.

*WCF 8.2*

8.2. The Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance and equal with the Father, did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon Him man´s nature,10 with all the essential properties, and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin;11 being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, of her substance. 12 So that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion.13 Which person is very God, and very man, yet one Christ, the only Mediator between God and man.14

*Belgic Confession Article 10*
Article 10: That Jesus Christ is true and eternal God

We believe that Jesus Christ, according to his divine nature, is the only begotten Son of God, begotten from eternity, not made nor created (for then he should be a creature), but co-essential and co-eternal with the Father, the express image of his person, and the brightness of his glory, equal unto him in all things. He is the Son of God, not only from the time that he assumed our nature, but from all eternity, as these testimonies, when compared together, teach us. Moses saith, that God created the world; and John saith, that all things were made by that Word, which he calleth God. And the apostle saith, that God make the worlds by his Son; likewise, that God created all things by Jesus Christ. Therefore it must needs follow, that he, who is called God, the Word, the Son, and Jesus Christ, did exist at that time, when all things were created by him. Therefore the prophet Micah saith, His goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. And the apostle: He hath neither beginning of days, nor end of life. He therefore is that true, eternal, and almighty God, whom we invoke, worship and serve.

*Thirty-Nine Articles: Two*

2. Of the Word or Son of God, which was made very Man.

The Son, which is the Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, and of one substance with the Father, took Man´s nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin, of her substance: so that two whole and perfect Natures, that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together in one Person, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God, and very Man; who truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile his Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for actual sins of men.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 26, 2005)

Joe, Brian,
Correct! 

However, I do not believe it is that mysterious. Someone aluded to the seed (sperm) earlier in the thread. The ovum or the seed, seperately, could not be the culprit. It is the *conception* that is where Adams legacy is transfered, else Christ would be in contact with sinful flesh ala Mary's egg. We know this is not true. The HS and the egg conceive something 'immaculate'; in this, this might be perceived as mysterious. Possibly better put, miraculous.



[Edited on 8-26-2005 by Scott Bushey]


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 26, 2005)

After studying this more, I see there is the tranducian/creationary argument. My argument above would fall into the transducian idea. Whether Transducian is correct is another thing...............


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 26, 2005)

Joseph,

We know 1) Joseph did not have realtions with Mary until AFTER she concieved and bore Jesus. 2) Mary was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit (bara in Hebrew like in Genesis where the Spirit was "forming" the earth). 3) WCF 8.2 says that Jesus took "upon Him man´s nature, with all the essential properties, and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin." How? "...being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost..." - where? - "...in the womb of the virgin Mary..." and then out of what? - "of *her* substance." Not Jospeh's. 

Lineage is covenantal, familial solidarity, not a matter of specific genetics.


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 26, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> Joseph,
> 
> We know 1) Joseph did not have realtions with Mary until AFTER she concieved and bore Jesus. 2) Mary was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit (bara in Hebrew like in Genesis where the Spirit was "forming" the earth). 3) WCF 8.2 says that Jesus took "upon Him man´s nature, with all the essential properties, and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin." How? "...being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost..." - where? - "...in the womb of the virgin Mary..." and then out of what? - "of *her* substance." Not Jospeh's.
> ...



I think you are not quite correct here.

The covenantal, familial solidarity is important, thus Joseph's pedigree in Matthew 1.

But if the *actual* genetic tie from Abe to Dave to Mary to Jesus isn't important then why does Mary's genealogy appear in Luke?

I think it was quite important for Jesus to be genetically related to Mary. Otherwise, He was not her son, was not really Abraham's descendant, not a part of Adam's race, and therefore unfit to be our Savior. At least, that is the way I see it. I think Mary's ancestry is shown in Luke for very good reason.


----------



## Augusta (Aug 26, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Augusta_
> Wasn't there something about the Jewish line following the mother? I noticed in the books of Kings and in the books of Chronicles the names of the mothers of certain Kings start being specifically mentioned. I also remember hearing this but not undertanding the significance.



Joseph's question ties into mine, so I am bumping my question up.


----------



## BrianBowman (Aug 26, 2005)

Scott,

In my post that you refer to (quoted below), I'm applying "mystery" subjectively, concerning my own growth in understanding the whole of Christology, not specifically to Christ's conception and what this produced in terms of the "God/man", which is indeed a miracle. Forgive me for not being more clear.



> Although His "genetic strand was of God" through the miraculous conception by the Holy Spirit (which we believe by a faith produced by the Holy Spirit in the veracity of what the Holy Scriptures teach us), Jesus Christ was a man, both fully flesh-and-blood and fully Divine. In my experience, even with the illumination of the Holy Spirit, there remain a strong element of mystery in this.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Aug 27, 2005)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> ...



How do you explain Jewish Adoption, and its differecnes in this case? For example, we KNOW that Jesus was not of Joseph's genetics, and Jospeh is in the lineage of David. So how does this apply to Jesus? Does Jospeh's lineage manke any differecne, or are Jews thinking about lineage non-genertically (how could they?), or familiarly?

Matthew 1:16 And Jacob begat *Joseph* the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Luke 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was *Joseph, of the house of David*; and the virgin's name was Mary.

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the *son of Joseph*, which was the son of Heli..."

Is Jesus the "son" of Jospeh by genetics? No.

So how is this reconciled?

Mary's substance was used to form Christ. Not Jospeh's. Why would Jesus, then, be called Joseph's son?

Mary's substacne is enough for "genetics" and her lineage, but familial solidarity is the point of Joseph's.

[Edited on 8-27-2005 by webmaster]


----------

