by jwblog 12 Replies latest watchtower bible
Is Jesus Christ the "son of man"? Jesus was born of God and never born of man correct? Did any portion of DNA from Mary ever enter into the blood of Jesus Christ? He would be born of imperfect offspring if part of Mary entered into his blood stream would he not?
So who really is the "son of man"? Who really is the faithful and discreet slave? Why does the faithful and discreet slave receive from Christ all that was bestowed to Christ upon his Fathers approval?
Good question.
Think of it this way. An angel can materialize into a human body, but that would not make him a "son of man." In order to become a "son of man" Jesus had to indeed become a descendant to Adam. But, whether he was "perfect" or not is another issue.
For instance, the "life" is said to come from the father. Thus even if Eve had sinned and became imperfect, Adam's children could still have been born without sin if he had not sinned. This is the basis for Jesus being a "perfect" human because Mary's ovum was fertilized by a perfect sperm. It is not understood precisely how this might have taken place, but definitely Jesus had to have DNA from Mary and he thus was a "son of man."
But the second time Christ appears in the flesh is a little different. He just basically inhabits the body of one of his followers and thus is imperfect at the second coming. He is still a "son of man" in this case. The difference between the perfect first coming and the second imperfect is represented by the difference in the wave offerings where the first is without leaven and the second with, the second, of course, representing that Christ will be in an imperfect body.
So, therefore, the title of "son of man" is quite specific and appropriate. Obviously, there are biotechnical details the scriptures do not elaborate on, but then would we understand them anyway? We just know that somehow Jesus was born perfect the first time which required him to be born as an infant without human father. The next time, not needing to be a sacrifice, he takes up the body of another human, one of his faithful anointed ones.
JC
From the posted link:
Personally, I think the scriptures have been tampered with over such a long period of time we have, today, a bible which includes 2 entirely different viewpoints about the personhood of Jesus.
Jesus seemed to go out of his way to represent himself as entirely HUMAN (Son of Man).
I think later accretions went back and doctored, where possible, the language to include deity.
What's your opinion?
Jesus as a diety and God was in effect when he was Michael, the Archangel. The Bible clearly represents him "emptying himself" of that glorious position to become a man. So the Bible is clear that when a man Christ is not the glorious spiritual diety, though he has that position reserved from him, obviously. So to contrast Christ as a human vs a diety is totally spurious in the first place, since Christ is more than one person at different times. So the above is immediately a straw man's argument that doesn't relate at all to what the Bible has to say. Jesus being a human temporarily does not dismiss his deity in heaven. When John says, "and the Word was god" he was talking about the time when Christ was up in heaven as Michael, the archangel. Not when he was here on the earth as a human.
So there is nothing in the scriptures that is contradictory and the idea that that contridiction suggest later Biblical tampering is simply not provable and is certainly unfounded. This is not simply an alternative opinion, therefore, it is an incompetence in understanding.
JC
Personally, I rank him up there right along with the prince from Cinderella and Snow White!!
Hi jwblog:
I do think Jesus had dna from mary and maybe from Joseph, somehow.. Because he was identified as the carpenter's son.. so he had to look like a family member.. Plus he had to be from Abraham's loins.
I do think Jesus was in the flesh with any dna flaws that the bloodline had..
Who really is the faithful and discreet slave? Why does the faithful and discreet slave receive from Christ all that was bestowed to Christ upon his Fathers approval?
Okay, I would say anointed christians.. and they recieve a reward when Jesus returns, for being faithful and dispensing food..
What do you think????
"Who is the Son of Man?
Why does the faithful and discreet slave receive from Christ all that was bestowed to Christ upon his Fathers approval?
Interesting statement. Technically, what happens, is that the GB fails in their role as providing food at the proper time and the prodigal son messiah comes up and provides that food. So the true FDS is Christ himself, who indeed, receives all responsibility for God's belongings.
The parallels to this is where the younger brother usurps from the older. The younger brother actually ended up doing God's will. "What is low becomes high, what is high becomes low." Thus we see the Rich Man in charge fo the food in god's house and Lazarus wishing to to have a few crumbs of it. Then there is a switch of circumstances and Lazarus has all the knowledge and food and the Rich Man is in torment.
So the FDS is really Christ himself who proves faithful, and the GB of JW fails and becomes the "evil slave"; as prophesied.
I hadn't really thought ot it retrospectively a lot but actually my research turns out to be fairly critical since not only does it vindicate and explain the Bible's chronology, it would suggest that the entire academic world are either relatively blind, incompetent or dishonest or biased by money or the Illuminati or Jewish or Catholic cryptic interests in using the revised timeline. There is definitely a supression of any hint at revisionism that would result in an alternative viable timeline for the NB Period or the Greek Period or the specific date of the Exodus. So I offer a credible choice in that regard, whether the academic world can respond to it or not. Certainly, it demonstrates to the GB who is obligated to take the Bible's references first where their errors are and how they can correct the secular timeline. Not just accept the Bible's chronology face value, but actually understand WHO, WHY, WHEN and HOW the timeline was revised and manipulated to what we have now, and who continued to participate in the manipulation long after the time of Christ.
JC
I personally believe that jesus was a clone . His DNA would have been that of adam and eve prior to their rebellion because in the end the main reason for his coming was to cancel out the original sin of adam . His sacrifice had to be equal to adam since the law was an eye for an eye , tooth for tooth , showing that something of equal value was needed . I think the faithful and discreet slave is a metaphor dealing with an organized religious system that is either accepted or rejected by christ when he inspected the content of their teachings.
Incidentally, few people know that the Bible gives the tribe for both the first and second coming messiahs. Jews understood the messiah would come through the line of Judah and also Joseph based upon this reference:
JOSEPH:
22 “Offshoot of a fruit-bearing tree, Joseph is the offshoot of a fruit-bearing tree by the fountain, that propels its branches up over a wall. 23 But the archers kept harassing him and shot at him and kept harboring animosity against him. 24 And yet his bow was dwelling in a permanent place, and the strength of his hands was supple. From the hands of the powerful one of Jacob, from there is the shepherd, the stone of Israel. 25 He is from the God of your father, and he will help you; and he is with the Almighty, and he will bless you with the blessings of the heavens above, with the blessings of the watery deep lying down below, with the blessings of the breasts and womb. 26 The blessings of your father will indeed be superior to the blessings of the eternal mountains, to the ornament of the indefinitely lasting hills. They will continue upon the head of Joseph, even upon the crown of the head of the one singled out from his brothers.
JUDAH:
8 “As for you, Judah, your brothers will laud you. Your hand will be on the back of the neck of your enemies. The sons of your father will prostrate themselves to you. 9 A lion cub Judah is. From the prey, my son, you will certainly go up. He bowed down, he stretched himself out like a lion and, like a lion, who dares rouse him? 10 The scepter will not turn aside from Judah, neither the commander’s staff from between his feet, until Shi´loh comes; and to him the obedience of the peoples will belong.
Notice that the rulership belongs to the house of Judah UNTIL SHILOH COMES. That is, the second-coming messiah. That is when the crown will come upon the head of one who descends through the tribe of Joseph. Joseph's children were half Egyptian, thus the prophecy: "Out of Egypt I called my son" is the reference here. Or in Revelation where the context of Jesus' impalement is on the broadway called "Sodom and Egypt" linkes the second coming messiah as being both gay and Egyptian.
So since we are talking about the "Son of man" we may as well note which specific lineages are involved with the messiah. Obviously, something else missed totally by the WTS. They have no place in their doctrine where the messiah could come through the line of Joseph, though they certainly make reference to the reference about the scepter in the line Judah being a reference to Jesus Christ. Interesting, that "Sprout" is associated with high-priest Joshua, and thus is a link with the second coming. In the Bible, a "twig" or a sprout is also a euphemism for a eunuch. A sprout or branch is the end of the line, which is what the symbolism is for a eunuch, or someone who is childless. Otherwise, someone married who has children, generation after generation becomes the trunk of a tree.
TECHNICAL SECOND-COMING FULFILLMENT: But one might ask, if the second coming messiah is born out of the tribe of Joseph, how does that work, because where is the tribe of Joseph now? After all, the 12 tribes of Israel are no more in that sense, correct? All the tribes are amalgamated into one nation of "Jews." Plus there is talk about the "lost ten tribes of Israel." Well, definitely a problem on a national level, but not to establish a single line of descent. You see, during Jesus' time, many still were able to trace their lineage back to one of the 12 patriarchs. Further, the "root" of the spiritual temple had to be 10% Jewish, 12,000 from each tribe. That would be impossible to keep up with the 12 tribes over 1900 years, especially with all the official records at the temple destroyed.
So what was decided was that select ones from the 12 tribes who could still prove their lineage were chosen out of the Christian congregation to survive down to our day. To actually stay alive all that time. That's why Jesus said directly "some standing here will not see death until I arrive." He literally meant some would be chosen to survive down to our day. Per the Bible we know at least the Apostle John and Paul were chosen to survive.
Theoretically then, at some point, perhaps 120 or more years before the second coming when Christ would be sealing members into the spiritual temple, these "survivors" (1 Thess 4:15) from the 1st century would marry into the modern population and by the time of the second coming would have produced perhaps up to 1 million descendants from which to choose the 12,000 members from each tribe to fulfill the Abrahamic Covenant in regards to the kingdom of priests.
The second-coming messiah, though it is clear he would be black, apparently would also be a descendant of Joseph and thus partly Egyptian as well.
Of course, if I'm really the messiah, this means that one of my ancestors lived in the 1st Century. With so much fuss made over the eventual second-coming messiah, it would seem this 1st-century person would introduce himself at some point, right? I mean, after all, I was introduced to Paul and John. Well, turns out I have seen him. No, we didn't have a conversation about it. But I was in his company for a while under special circumstances (public circumstances). Only later was I told via holy spirit who he was. Of course, I was wondering who he was since obviously he singled me out. Now I know.
Interesting, I could tell by his appearance which branch of the family he fathered. In fact, that is rather obvious. At any rate, that is the mechanism by which this prophecy is fulfilled. That's how the second-coming messiah ends up in the line of Joseph to fulfill that prophecy. The prophecy also reiterates how Joseph would end up captian over all his brothers, even Judah, through whom the royal Davidic kingship comes. In the end, second coming messiah is the one all the tribes of Israel would bow down to.
So turns out I'm part Jewish and part Egyptian, which I totally can relate to. Some of my relatives have that "exotic" Egyptian look. But also of note, which also has a practical explanation for me is that Joseph and Benjamin were the only two sons born from Rachel. Joseph was half-brother to everyone except Benjamin.
Just in passing, has anyone noticed how the way Native Americans name themselves must be quite similar to how the Jews name themselves? I mean the names mean something. Like Rachel means "Lamb of God." Indian names describe as well, like "Sitting Bull" or "Dances with Wolves" (). Interesting cultural self perception for names. Of course, one presumes there might be a connection.
"Until Shiloh comes..." Shiloh means "peace". Melchizedek was the king of Salem, which also means "peace."
So, at least at the second coming, Christ is not only a son of man in the sense he becomes a descendant of Adam. He is also a descendant of Abraham, Rachel, Joseph and an Egyptian.
JC
