The ESV Study Bible: Sin comes from men?

(Disclaimer: You should be careful about taking this post too seriously. I’m certainly not.)
In conjunction with a conversation we were having over at LDS & Evangelical Conversations (the old “God had sex with Mary” thing, Take 642) , I was flipping through my online copy of the ESV Study Bible, reading what it said about Jesus’s conception. This is how Luke 1:35 reads:
And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God.”
Now check out the Study Bible notes:
Luke 1:35 The Holy Spirit will perform this great miracle, so that Mary will become pregnant without having sexual relations with a man. Thereforeindicates that Jesus’ holiness derives from his being conceived by the Holy Spirit. Though Jesus was a genuine human being, he did not inherit a sinful nature and disposition from Adam, as all other human beings do (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 4:15; 1 Pet. 2:22; 1 John 3:5; by contrast, Ps. 143:2; Eph. 2:3)
Concerning Jesus’s conception, Mormons believe that 23 of His chromosomes came from Mary while 23 of His chromosomes quite literally came from the Father. (cf. BYU Professor Stephen Robinson, “He’s got 46 chromosomes; 23 came from Mary, 23 came from God the eternal Father,” cited here.) Evangelicals, on the other hand, believe that 23 of His chromosomes came from Mary and 23 came… ex nihilo? I guess.
In any case, that still means Jesus got 23 chromosomes from His (sinful) human mother. The Catholics get around this problem with their doctrine of Immaculate Conception: God cleansed Mary in the womb the moment she was conceived by her parents so that she lacked original sin, and she then continued to live a sinless life. However, Protestants reject Immaculate Conception and especially reject the notion that Mary was sinless.
I’m seeing two possibilities here on what the ESV Study Bible is trying to teach on why Jesus was born without a sinful nature:
Option A: The Holy Spirit purified the entire embryo as Jesus was conceived, overwriting the sinful nature present in Mary’s ovum. Kind of like Jesus got His own immaculate conception.
Option B: The “sinful nature” gene is transmitted through human sperm. Ova are always pure and untainted by sin. Jesus’s conception did not involve human sperm, so He was born without sin. I think the ESV Study Bible note implies this interpretation when it clarifies that Jesus “did not inherit a sinful nature and disposition from Adam.” Not Adam and Eve; just Adam.
I hereby officially endorse Option B. Sin comes from sperm. Thanks a lot, men.
(Now tell me which gender shouldn’t be serving as overseers, you ESV hyper-compies.)

Comments

The ESV Study Bible: Sin comes from men? — 7 Comments

  1. This is why I detest study notes. Too brief and they tend to blur the authority of the text with the note.
    Strictly speaking across traditional Christians lines, there is no nature that is of itself sinful. All natures are good and sin is a privation.
    Second, sin can refer to corruption or to a personal act.
    Third, in the ancient world, the idesprad belief was that children pre-existed whole in the male and the woma supplied the “ground” for the seed to grow. Hence the sin or corruption came from the male. This is why some early Christian writers opposed not only abortion, but barrier methods of contraception.
    Fourth, Christ takes his human nature from his mother and no one else.
    Fifth sin is a metaphysical problem and not a physical one per se, so there can’t be a sin gene.
    There are other options on the table to consider. That Jesus takes up a corrupt and weak nature from his mother and purifies it throughout his life while he as a divine person never committs any sinful acts. In light of Heb 4:15 this goes a long way in explaining how Jesus can by truely synpathetic with our struggles. See also 2 Cor 5:21
    As for complementarianism, the fact that man is the source of corruption wouldn’t imply that men alone weren’t licensed to lead in the church, but is rather proof of it, since sin moves into the race from the font of the race on down.
    In any case, women are not less corrupt than men. :P ~
  2. Interesting. I’ve never really considered the mechanics of Mary’s conception. I do believe that children are born innocent, so I may be leaning towards Perry’s proposal. Luke 2:52- And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man. As the Son of God, he had the ability to withstand the temptations that the rest of us give in to.
    And I reject the notion that sin comes from sperm. There is nothing more holy than good, fun, married sex. :)
  3. Kew,
    The Orthodox thnk that children are conceived innocent as to actions, but naturally corrupt and deficient in natural powers. Their nature is weakened and disordered.
    On our viw Jesus’ increasing in wisdom is the dvine person acting and existing united to his humanity. So Jesus has a divine intellect he shares with the Father and the Spirit and a human intellect. The former cannot increase in wisdom, but the latter can.
  4. Perry,
    I can agree with that. Our natural inclinations are towards sloth, selfishness, immediate gratification, etc, which often leads to sin. It is only through God that we can overcome our natures and become more like Him.
  5. BRILLIANT analysis, Jack. Just brilliant!
    Those damn spermies are even more trouble than my 9th grade health teacher told me. As you’ve so aptly demonstrated here, the Bible even proves it.
  6. Perry ~ That is an excellent point about ancient views on how children are created. I hadn’t thought of that while I was doing the post.
    That Jesus takes up a corrupt and weak nature from his mother and purifies it throughout his life while he as a divine person never committs any sinful acts.
    This thought actually occurred to me as well. What’s wrong with Christ having a weak/sinful nature so long as He overcomes it and doesn’t sin? And what was the point of the Temptation of Jesus if He had no desire to sin in the first place? Seems like He put the devil through some terrible grandstanding otherwise. And I thought it was odd that the Study Bible cites Hebrew 4:15 as proof that Christ had no sinful nature when the passage seems to say the exact opposite.
    Anyways, I don’t actually think sin comes from men; I don’t know if you keep up on the ESV v. TNIV controversy in the evangelical community, but the ESV (and its study Bible) are largely the creation of a group of male scholars who wanted to curb egalitarianism & feminism in the evangelical community and re-assert male dominance. So I like to poke fun at them when I can.
    As for men themselves, what can I say, I’m a huge fan.
    Kew ~ There is nothing more holy than good, fun, married sex.
    Couldn’t agree with you more. The Song of Solomon really is one of my favorite books in the Bible…
    Katie ~ Those damn spermies are even more trouble than my 9th grade health teacher told me.
    LOL
Categories:

Related Post:



0 коментарі:

Post a Comment

ClobberBlog | Mormonism, Evangelical Christianity