If Jesus had Kids, enlighten me about why this is heresy?

[cosmosdan]

@Thudlow Boink

Although, Jesus either had kids or he didn’t, and whichever it is, it ain’t gonna change or progress no matter how much we avoid stagnation.

right, but it would be nice if the thought of Jesus having kids didn’t freak people out as if it’s blasphemy. What a waste of energy.

[Polycarp]

@monavis

He taught them to say “Our Father” indicating they were chikdren of God,( no mention of adoption), There are so many ways to interpet what the writers of the Bible wrote, one can take any passage and use it to one’s own advantage. The Holy Spirit must inspire all (or many) people to see things differently.

Since Jesus told the folowers that the world would end with the stars falling and the moon not giving it’s light etc. would indicate that he did not have any more knowledge of the scientific world than any other person of his time. Of course we do not know what Jesus actually said, Just what some one quoted him as saying. People either choose to believe those writers or not.

Monavis

OK, this is a simple concept but requires more disclaimers than a Nigerian bank account.

First, nobody believes that the relationship between the First and Second Persons of the Trinity is exactly that of a human father and son, where Mary could sue God the Father for child support (if she could find a court of competent jurisdiction) or, in the sarcastic words of Islam, “Does God have a penis that he can beget a son?” Rather, it’s a real relationship between two Persons in one Godhead for which the closest human vocabulary terms are those borrowed from the ideal father/son relationship.

Second, the Mormons have an entirely different take on this, as on many Christian doctrines. I think that needs to be said, and then firmly tabled as a source of confusion on what the rest of Christianity believes.

Given that, however, Jesus is described in the creedal statements as monogenitos – “only-begotten.” The hyphen in the English translation is important. God has one Son by “natural” means – whatever the ineffable spiritual concept is for which “begotten” is the human parallel. Paul makes clear in the most thorough exploration of his theology, Romans, that through Jesus’ Atonement and our baptisms we are accepted as His brothers and sisters, children of God by adoption and grace.

One only-begotten Son of God. Billions of sons and daughters, God’s children by adoption. A significant difference.

[cosmosdan]

@Polycarp

Given that, however, Jesus is described in the creedal statements as monogenitos – “only-begotten.” The hyphen in the English translation is important. God has one Son by “natural” means – whatever the ineffable spiritual concept is for which “begotten” is the human parallel. Paul makes clear in the most thorough exploration of his theology, Romans, that through Jesus’ Atonement and our baptisms we are accepted as His brothers and sisters, children of God by adoption and grace.

One only-begotten Son of God. Billions of sons and daughters, God’s children by adoption. A significant difference.

That is a good explaination of it. My question is what did Jesus teach in his own words vs the creedal statements?

I find it mentioned only in John 1 and again in John 3 when speaking to Nicodemus.

[monavis]

@Polycarp

OK, this is a simple concept but requires more disclaimers than a Nigerian bank account.

First, nobody believes that the relationship between the First and Second Persons of the Trinity is exactly that of a human father and son, where Mary could sue God the Father for child support (if she could find a court of competent jurisdiction) or, in the sarcastic words of Islam, “Does God have a penis that he can beget a son?” Rather, it’s a real relationship between two Persons in one Godhead for which the closest human vocabulary terms are those borrowed from the ideal father/son relationship.

Second, the Mormons have an entirely different take on this, as on many Christian doctrines. I think that needs to be said, and then firmly tabled as a source of confusion on what the rest of Christianity believes.

Given that, however, Jesus is described in the creedal statements as monogenitos – “only-begotten.” The hyphen in the English translation is important. God has one Son by “natural” means – whatever the ineffable spiritual concept is for which “begotten” is the human parallel. Paul makes clear in the most thorough exploration of his theology, Romans, that through Jesus’ Atonement and our baptisms we are accepted as His brothers and sisters, children of God by adoption and grace.

One only-begotten Son of God. Billions of sons and daughters, God’s children by adoption. A significant difference.

There was no indication of you will be children by adoption,but Jesus is quoted as saying,If you have seen me You have seen “the Father” “the” Father and I are one. I put the quotes around" the" because he didn’t say My father and I are one.As I stated it is a matter of belief, I interpet it to mean we are all a part of a greater whole,and that is how I see Jesus meaning it. Paul would say only begotten son because that is how he understood it at that time. Paul also said;" it is no longer I that live, but Christ who lives in me".To me that means he is trying to live a Christ like life.

Jesus could hardly be called a son by natural means as either the Holy Spirit started a child growing in Mary or her egg was fertilized by a word of God(Like the Stars(let there be light etc,) Jesus would have no earthly father so his conception would not be called natural.

Jesus taught the followers to Say our Father before his death, so it must be that he considered them children of God, even before his sacrifice that they were the children of God. Just as the Psalmist called the men of his day Gods and children of God.

I understand it is a matter of translation, that is why there are so many divisions in religion.

Monavis