Why did Jesus have to be male?

[nobspeople]

Along the same lines of the thread here
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38174
Why did Jesus have to be male?
I assume he is though some may debate it if the above thread is any indication about what words mean and what terms were used then as they are now.

But why did God (whatever gender it is or isn't) decide to make a male version of himself/son (whichever you choose to believe)?
Why couldn't Jesus have been a female? Would the sacrifice he's said to have made been any more of less successful?
Was Jesus needed to be male in order to get respect and attention? If so, could this be why God is male?
What was the reason why Jesus was and had to be male?
Or was if simply random?

[JehovahsWitness]

#[1. Adam was former (created ) first
##2. Adam was not deceived
#3. [Eve] was thoroughly deceived
#4. Eve became a sinner

Paul points out that, unlike his wife who evidently believed her actions would obtain them some kind of davantage, Adam was fully aware of the true consequences of his actions. Although neither was excused since reegardless of motive both committed a deliberate act of disobedience, Eve sinned first but Adam sinned worst ! What neither of these statements (#2 , #3) carry however is any indication Eve was held responsible for how their disastrous decisions would impact mankind.

#[1. Adam was former (created ) first
##2. Adam was not deceived
#3. [Eve] was thoroughly deceived
#4. Eve became a sinner

Again, this statement does not carry any indication Eve was held responsible for anything but her own sin. She became a sinner. So did her husband, but ONLY when speaking of Adam does the bible attribute that sin as being the cause of death for their offspring.

CONCLUSION: There is no direct mention of responsibility in Timothy, Paul's mention of Adam and Eve is an aside, but it is enough to show that man Adam occupied a god given position of headship which in turn supports the explicit statements in scripture that death and sin came, not through the woman but through the man.

[Paul of Tarsus]

No, the bible does not hold Eve as responsible for the fall of mankind, she is never mentioned in this regard (responsibility for the plight of their descendents). She sinned first and definitely influenced Adam to do the same, but Adam alone is ultimately held as responsible for humanity's subsequent situation.

ROMANS 5:12, 15

That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because they had all sinned. ... For if by one man’s trespass many died, how much more did the undeserved kindness of God and his free gift by the undeserved kindness of the one man,

DOES ROMANS 5:12;15 INDICATE ADAM WAS HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR MANKIND'S FALL?

Romans 5:12;15 contains several biblical facts none of which indicate Adam's responsibility for mankind's condition. Let us examine the statements

#1. Sin entered through Adam, not from Adam.
#2. Adam was not deceived.
#3. Eve was the sinner.

#1. Adam was created first. We are told Adam was created first because Eve took on the role of an interloper whose intrusion on Adam's world was to lead to trouble for him. That's why sin merely came through Adam while it originated in Eve's action. She sinned first being deceived by the snake. Adam, realizing that the damage was already done, followed suit in a symbolic gesture of union with his wife. So the Bible clearly blames Eve rather than Adam for the Fall.

-OBJECTION: But didn't Eve usurp Her husband's headship? She sure did, and that was yet another one of her sins. To her, Adam was her ruler in name only.

The Bible's message then is this: See what trouble these women are? The world would be better off without them!

[JehovahsWitness]

ROMANS 12:15

For if by one man’s trespass many died, how much more did the undeserved kindness of God and his free gift by the undeserved kindness of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to many!

ROMANS 5:12, 15
Sin entered through Adam, not from Adam.

So? So what? "through" "by" "because of" how does that change the point of who responsibility vis-a-vis humanity's plight ?

... sin merely came through Adam while it originated in Eve's action.

Ditto

[JehovahsWitness]

To her, Adam was her ruler in name only.

Agreed, but her perception is irrevevant, the question is not did she ignore godly submission(which she did) any more than is it, did Adam fail to act as he should have; The question is : does the bible hold the man or the woman responsible for mankind's condition?


Without falling into "cum hoc ergo propter hoc" ('with this, therefore because of this') both the chronological order of events and the individual failings are irrelevant, scripturally the only question is who was placed in what position and as a result which of the two was held responsible for mankind's plight. In this regard, Romans is clear enough.

JW



RELATED POST

Does 1 Tim 2:13 place the responsibility for mankind's fall on Eve?
viewtopic.php?p=1037602#p1037602

Who sinned first? Adam or Eve?[Gen 3:6]
viewtopic.php?p=1029137#p1029137

Could Adam have prevented the temptation of Eve ?
viewtopic.php?p=1028950#p1028950

If God knew Adam needed a mate, why did he make Adam to wait for her?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 16#p857016

Are birth pains sexist?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 03#p801703

For more details please go to other posts related to...

EVE, ORIGINAL SIN and ...THE GARDEN OF EDEN

[Paul of Tarsus]

ROMANS 12:15

For if by one man’s trespass many died, how much more did the undeserved kindness of God and his free gift by the undeserved kindness of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to many!

ROMANS 5:12, 15
Sin entered through Adam, not from Adam.

So? So what? "through" "by" "because of" how does that change the point of who responsibility vis-a-vis humanity's plight ?

So you're saying that the actual words used in various Bible passages don't matter; we must accept the official interpretation of the Jehovah's Witnesses, and that's that! Sorry, but I think for myself. If sin entered through Adam, then it didn't start with him. That's what the word "through" means.

To her, Adam was her ruler in name only.

Agreed, but her perception is irrevevant, the question is not did she ignore godly submission(which she did) any more than is it, did Adam renegade his responsibilities as her head (which he did). The question is : does the bible hold the man or the woman responsible for mankind's condition?

I don't know what Adam "renegaded," but I do know sloppy posting when I see it. The use of proper spelling, grammar, and the correct words is very useful to communicate for and represent Jehovah. Otherwise your posts will look like they originated with some guy who's been indoctrinated into a fanatical religious sect and who doesn't know what he's talking about.

But you're missing my whole point. On post 32 I was lampooning your efforts to make the Biblical interpretation of Jehovah's witnesses look legitimate. Anybody can go on long-winded and convoluted tangents claiming this and that about some Bible passages. I don't generally argue what the Bible means because you can make it say whatever you want it to say. Let's just say that I've read the Bible, and to me at least it's a very sexist collection of works.

[JehovahsWitness]

IF SIN CAME THROUGH ADAM DOES THAT MEAN HE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS EFFECT ON HIS OFFSPRING?

ROMANS 5:12, 15
Sin entered through Adam, not from Adam.

If sin entered through Adam, then it didn't start with him. That's what the word "through" means.

Indeed, however it is premature to conclude than responsibility automatically lies with where something starts. Reponsibility does not necessarily lie with the originator of an act or even who commits an act, but with who is charged to ensure an action does or does not impacts on another. This is usually the person himself, but not always.

To illistrate: A parent neglects to properly survey his two year old, the child runs out into speeding traffic and is killed. The child himself acted in a way that lead to his own death, and the driver caused the child death with his car (which was manufactured by someone). However neither the car manufacturer, the driver nor even the child would normally be held responsible for the harm caused, because its guardian was responsible for the child's wellbeing.

The question then is not who sinned first, nor who introduced the planet to sin nor even, where or with whom sin originated but who was charged with protecting humanity from harm. Who was supposed to stand between danger and the mankind (the children) and say "If you want to touch my kids you'll have to go through me!" Biblically, the answer would be, not the mother, but the rather THE FATHER in his god-given position as head of the family.

Adam (not Eve) stood at the door of mankind, his job was to protect his unborn children. Had he done his job, the sin that his wife committed would have affected her alone. As it is, Adam let her sin get through him to us.

It hit us like a 16-wheeler truck and we are still paying for his negligence.





JW

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

OMNIPOTENCE , RESPONSIBILITY and ...SELECTIVE FOREKNOWLEDGE

[JehovahsWitness]

I don't know what Adam "renegaded," but I do know sloppy posting when I see it.

You're right, my bad: duly corrected (see edit)

[Paul of Tarsus]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #37]

If the Bible isn't sexist, then I wonder why it takes so much effort to prove otherwise. Maybe the Bible only appears to be sexist, and millions of men over the past twenty centuries have misunderstood the Bible as advocating misogyny. And all that despite their reading and studying the Bible. Nowadays we are lucky enough to have CT Russel and his followers to straighten us out on this issue. They tell us that women are not granted second-class citizenship in the Bible. It is interesting to note that this stance on the Bible is consistent with modern sensibilities about sexism. Maybe it's just a coincidence.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #37]

Maybe the Bible only appears to be sexist, and millions of men over the past twenty centuries have misunderstood the Bible as advocating misogyny. And all that despite their reading and studying the Bible.

I am not really interested in discussing how the bible appears (which in my experience says as much about the reader as the book itself) so much as what it says. It is only in closely examaming the text itself, can we be freed from falling back on argumentum ad populum.



source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumen ... %20opinion.



Question everything!



JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

[brunumb]

However neither the car manufacturer, the driver nor even the child would normally be held responsible for the harm caused, because its guardian was responsible for the child's wellbeing.

[My bolding]

I hope that Jehovah's Witnesses keep that in mind when their children are being sexually abused by fellow members of the sect and their suffering is swept under the rug in order to protect the image of the organisation.