Was Jesus Born with the very same human nature as we have?

[Dachaser]

Was Jesus Born with the very same human nature as we have? The scriptures teach to us that Jesus was born into the very likeness of us, so was this referring to us in our fallen humanity, or in the sense of being a real flesh and blood human being?

 

[RamistThomist]

If Jesus had our fallen human nature, then he would have had to have been sanctified at the moment of conception to clear him from the charge of original sin. Which is kind of ironic, since we would have the benefits of the cross (not yet having happened) happening to the one who would accomplish all of that.

 

[Dachaser]

If Jesus had our fallen human nature, then he would have had to have been sanctified at the moment of conception to clear him from the charge of original sin. Which is kind of ironic, since we would have the benefits of the cross (not yet having happened) happening to the one who would accomplish all of that.

I am asking this based upon dealings with some who seemed to be holding to the truth that Jesus was born with same nature as us, and that He overcame by always submitting to the Will of the father, and being empowered to be able to do that by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Belgic Confession:
q18


So then we confess that God fulfilled the promise which he had made to the early fathers by the mouth of his holy prophets when he sent his only and eternal Son into the world at the time set by him.The Son took the “form of a servant” and was made in the “likeness of man,”^33 truly assuming a real human nature, with all its weaknesses, except for sin; being conceived in the womb of the blessed virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit, without male participation.

And he not only assumed human nature as far as the body is concerned but also a real human soul, in order that he might be a real human being. For since the soul had been lost as well as the body he had to assume them both to save them both together.

Therefore we confess, against the heresy of the Anabaptists who deny that Christ assumed human flesh from his mother, that he “shared the very flesh and blood of children”;^34 that he is “fruit of the loins of David” according to the flesh;^35 “born of the seed of David” according to the flesh;^36 “fruit of the womb of the virgin Mary”;^37 “born of a woman”;^38 “the seed of David”;^39 “a shoot from the root of Jesse”;^40 “the offspring of Judah,”^41 having descended from the Jews according to the flesh; “from the seed of Abraham”– for he “assumed Abraham’s seed” and was “made like his brothers except for sin.”^42

In this way he is truly our Immanuel– that is: “God with us.”^43

^33 Phil. 2:7 ^34 Heb. 2:14 ^35 Acts 2:30 ^36 Rom. 1:3 ^37 Luke 1:42 ^38 Gal. 4:4 ^39 2 Tim. 2:8 ^40 Rom. 15:12 ^41 Heb. 7:14 ^42 Heb. 2:17; 4:15 ^43 Matt. 1:23

 

[RamistThomist]

I am asking this based upon dealings with some who seemed to be holding to the truth that Jesus was born with same nature as us, and that He overcame by always submitting to the Will of the father, and being empowered to be able to do that by the Holy Spirit.

I get that, and the term "fallen" hasn't always been used the same way in the church. But if you hold to original sin, which appears to be the natural reading of the Scriptures, then you cannot say that Jesus had a fallen human nature.

But it goes back to earlier conversations we had: what is "essential" to humanity? Whatever is essential to humanity, sin isn't. Sin is common to humanity, but not essential to it. How can I prove this? Because:

1. Adam and Eve were fully human, but not sinful (before the Fall).
2. We will be fully human in heaven, but I hope we won't have sin natures or fallen natures.

 

[earl40]

It comes down to was Jesus like the pre fall Adam, or the post fall Adam....morally speaking. BTW the answer is pre fall. Many people think the opposite.

 

[Dachaser]

Belgic Confession:
q18


So then we confess that God fulfilled the promise which he had made to the early fathers by the mouth of his holy prophets when he sent his only and eternal Son into the world at the time set by him.The Son took the “form of a servant” and was made in the “likeness of man,”^33 truly assuming a real human nature, with all its weaknesses, except for sin; being conceived in the womb of the blessed virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit, without male participation.

And he not only assumed human nature as far as the body is concerned but also a real human soul, in order that he might be a real human being. For since the soul had been lost as well as the body he had to assume them both to save them both together.

Therefore we confess, against the heresy of the Anabaptists who deny that Christ assumed human flesh from his mother, that he “shared the very flesh and blood of children”;^34 that he is “fruit of the loins of David” according to the flesh;^35 “born of the seed of David” according to the flesh;^36 “fruit of the womb of the virgin Mary”;^37 “born of a woman”;^38 “the seed of David”;^39 “a shoot from the root of Jesse”;^40 “the offspring of Judah,”^41 having descended from the Jews according to the flesh; “from the seed of Abraham”– for he “assumed Abraham’s seed” and was “made like his brothers except for sin.”^42

In this way he is truly our Immanuel– that is: “God with us.”^43

^33 Phil. 2:7 ^34 Heb. 2:14 ^35 Acts 2:30 ^36 Rom. 1:3 ^37 Luke 1:42 ^38 Gal. 4:4 ^39 2 Tim. 2:8 ^40 Rom. 15:12 ^41 Heb. 7:14 ^42 Heb. 2:17; 4:15 ^43 Matt. 1:23

This seems to be the sticking point, as those others discussing this issue with see Jesus as being same as us in His humanity, but that would seem to make Him subject to the effects of the fall also then.

 

[Dachaser]

I get that, and the term "fallen" hasn't always been used the same way in the church. But if you hold to original sin, which appears to be the natural reading of the Scriptures, then you cannot say that Jesus had a fallen human nature.

But it goes back to earlier conversations we had: what is "essential" to humanity? Whatever is essential to humanity, sin isn't. Sin is common to humanity, but not essential to it. How can I prove this? Because:

1. Adam and Eve were fully human, but not sinful (before the Fall).
2. We will be fully human in heaven, but I hope we won't have sin natures or fallen natures.

When Jesus returns, we shall be as He is, and would think that means not sharing in Deity, but having now the same glorified body as he has, no more effected by the Fall, and no more sin nature remaining.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Jesus was the God-Man, he had two natures: 1) fully divine, 2) fully human.

Jesus activity on earth displays his full divinity, and his full humanity. His miracles display his divine, personal power; and equally, they display the endowment upon his humanity, poured outupon him at the Holy Spirit anointing (when he was baptized), whereof he was given above measure (Jn.3:34) for his sacrificial labors as the Mediator.

In that narrow sense, Jesus as man possessed the Holy Spirit for the conduct of his office (as the OT types, prophets, priests, and kings did), and worked in perfect submission to his Father. But Jesus was not sinless on account of the Holy Spirit; but on his own he was sinless (Heb.2:16-17; cf.4:15; 1Pet.1:19), from the time he was incarnate and born of the virgin. He has "life in himself," Jn.5:26, showing he has divine essence equal to the Father.

God the Son as the Lord Jesus Christ did not rely upon the Holy Spirit to "overcome" sin, and find strength to obey God the Father. He didn't "set the ideal example" for us, to push the rest of us to see what possibilities we might attain by imitative acts of faith and submission. I know that's what some of these New-Apostolic-Reformation (NAR)/charismatic types are teaching; and it's just ancient heresy repackaged.

Beware of people who are taking Jesus in the opposite direction from where the Bible elevates him (reducing him to mere manhood); for by the same act, they are making effort to elevate themselves in the opposite direction from where the Bible abases them.

Jesus' human nature is just like ours, that is: like ours was meant to be when Adam was unfallen, righteous and obedient. In our flesh, he had to endure the environment that our sin created; even though he was sinless. In that sense, he was a "fish out of water;" but the environment doesn't make a man what he is, only makes him cope with its effect. He was a righteous man, uncorrupted (clean) and incorruptible. He would speak--not as Isaiah confessed--as a man of clean lips amid a world of the unclean.

 

[Dachaser]

Jesus was the God-Man, he had two natures: 1) fully divine, 2) fully human.

Jesus activity on earth displays his full divinity, and his full humanity. His miracles display his divine, personal power; and equally, they display the endowment upon his humanity, poured outupon him at the Holy Spirit anointing (when he was baptized), whereof he was given above measure (Jn.3:34) for his sacrificial labors as the Mediator.

In that narrow sense, Jesus as man possessed the Holy Spirit for the conduct of his office (as the OT types, prophets, priests, and kings did), and worked in perfect submission to his Father. But Jesus was not sinless on account of the Holy Spirit; but on his own he was sinless (Heb.2:16-17; cf.4:15; 1Pet.1:19), from the time he was incarnate and born of the virgin. He has "life in himself," Jn.5:26, showing he has divine essence equal to the Father.

God the Son as the Lord Jesus Christ did not rely upon the Holy Spirit to "overcome" sin, and find strength to obey God the Father. He didn't "set the ideal example" for us, to push the rest of us to see what possibilities we might attain by imitative acts of faith and submission. I know that's what some of these New-Apostolic-Reformation (NAR)/charismatic types are teaching; and it's just ancient heresy repackaged.

Beware of people who are taking Jesus in the opposite direction from where the Bible elevates him (reducing him to mere manhood); for by the same act, they are making effort to elevate themselves in the opposite direction from where the Bible abases them.

Jesus' human nature is just like ours, that is: like ours was meant to be when Adam was unfallen, righteous and obedient. In our flesh, he had to endure the environment that our sin created; even though he was sinless. In that sense, he was a "fish out of water;" but the environment doesn't make a man what he is, only makes him cope with its effect. He was a righteous man, uncorrupted (clean) and incorruptible. He would speak--not as Isaiah confessed--as a man of clean lips amid a world of the unclean.

Would you see some holding to that charismatic viewpoint regarding How he stayed sinless to be tied into His Kenosis, as they would have Him basically as Human only while here, relying fully upon the Holy Spirit?

 

[bookslover]

Jesus had (and has) a true and complete human nature - sin excepted (as well as being fully divine, of course).