Here are some exploratory thoughts (about 24 minutes) I had in relation to the particularity of Jesus. Here's my question--did Jesus come to earth as "everyman," or did he come as a particular man? He certainly showed us the potential of every human. But did he come to earth as a particular man, with a particular combination of DNA like any of us? I suggest that his coming to earth as a man did not imply that females are less central in identity than men. It rather is just one example of "Jesus the particular."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
If Jesus had come as a woman:
1.He couldn't have been the new Adam: A husband who perfectly loves and protects His wife and who submits as the male head of the household to the will of God the Father.
2.He couldn't have been the savior King from the Davidic line.
3.He couldn't have had a bride.
If Jesus was married in the physical world, it may have confused the issue with His body, the church, being considered His bride. If He married in the physical world, and His wife and/or kids sinned, it would have been very confusing to consider Him as the God most high who produced less than perfect created things.
He is, in my mind, the perfect male (as well as the perfect human) because He communicates (with everyone, including women) in an open, honest and direct way. His words and His works always go together: what He says is what He does. His verbal and non-verbal behavior were no doubt as completely congruent back then as they are nowadays: No deception can be found in Him.
I wonder what He would have scored on the Clifton StrengthFinder?
I would consider these all contextual reasons to come as a man rather than ontological ones.
Then the conclusion is the Son of God was not sent to fulfill the law in a male human body for ontological reasons, but for contextual reasons?
That's at least what I'm arguing.
Post a Comment