Jesus and Adam but no Vince…
December 14, 2006 4 Comments
It has seemed as of late like this blog is mainly about porcine polemics and/or superhuman quarterbacks from the University of Texas currently playing for the Tennessee Titans.
The first man, Adam, was created out of the dust of the earth. He bypassed infancy, childhood, the awkwardness of adolescence and came into existence as an adult. The belly button question really is quite irrelevant at this point in time.
The fact that Adam was created an adult may or may not have any correlation with the apparent age of the universe (i.e. if the universe is only thousands of years old why can we see stars that are billions of light-years away?). If God created an adult why not create the universe ‘as an adult?’ I realize this as unscientific a statement as one can make, but what statement (coming from anyone) dealing with origins isn’t, right?
Paul calls Jesus the last Adam or the second man. Whereas the first one caused the fall of the human race and the spoiling of God’s creation, through the second One “many will be made righteous.”
What I’m wondering is why was the second “Adam” born of a woman? He went through the stages of human development in Mary’s womb, then was born and went through infancy, childhood, and adolescence (would love to know what that was like). Is there any theological significance to this? There must be, I suppose. Does the fact that Jesus went through these different stages of development suggest that He had to know what it was all like?
Was it necessary for his purpose here on earth? Is there any biblical support for this?
I really didn’t mean to bring this up during this time of year when His birth is celebrated. Though if we are going to be consistent pro-lifers shouldn’t we give more importance to His conception than His birth?
Last Row 
Dare I try to tackle this? Well, as I’m sure you’re aware, there was no woman to bear Adam, therefore his creation. *aside note – the chicken came before the egg, just in case anyone asks* 🙂
It was not until after the fall in the garden that woman became a childbearer, and all of humanity following the fall have entered the world by birth since the fall. The humanity of Christ entered this world in the same manner (although he was born trichotomous instead of dichotomous).
As to your parting question, more importance was (and should be) placed on His birth. The gospel of Luke tells us that the multitude of angels celebrated His birth, not his conception.
Doesn’t the RCC celebrate the conception too?
Dunno. Do they?
Greetings,
There are tons of reasons why Jesus was born of a woman, but I believe these passages of scripture sums it up:
Hebrews 2:14-15 “Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death-that is the devil-and free those who all their lives where held in slavery by their fear of death.”
Jesus took on our human nature in order to redeem the human race, since humans were created as flesh and blood.
I Corinthians 15:49 “And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the likeness of the man from heaven.”
It was not necessary for Adam/Eve to experience infancy, since it had no value. The purpose of countless prophecy for Jesus was to record the time, purpose, location, etc of the candidate of Messiah/Redeemer in question, which all point to Jesus.
As for the ‘first Adam and the bellybutton theory,’ if God created the heavens and all that is within them and He created us down to the cellular level and all that is within them, why couldnt He create Adam/Eve with a bellybutton already fashioned in them? We need to take God out of the box, and let Him be who He is: a Creator.