Why the virgin birth instead of a second Adam or second Moses?

[Neoplatonist]

Given God’s power and all, can someone spell out a persuasive, coherent line of reasoning for why God needed to actually impregnate Mary instead of just creating a new, improved Adam from clay (Adam 2.0) or just revealing his nature and plans to a regular human being (imagine Moses multiplied times ten)?

Those options would have avoided a number of weird issues, like what if Mary had said no - would she have gone to Hell? Would Gabriel have kept asking around til he found a girl to say yes? If Mary believed it was GOD, how could she answer without duress? If she didn’t believe it was GOD, then why in the world would she consent? Etc. I’m not trying to sort all those out, so don’t let me distract from the main question. I’m just establishing context.

If it’s just another one of those mysteries, then fine; I don’t need you to tell me that. I’m also down with how I should have more faith all around, so don’t need reminders of that either. I’m curious about ways to make sense out of it within the limits of reason.

Thanks for joining in and sharing your insights!

 

[TxGodfollower]

Would Gabriel have kept asking around til he found a girl to say yes?

Quick side note; got a big LOL on this one.
Gabriel: “Greetings Jane, you are favored of the Lord #3,183. The first 3,182 turned him down, so its your turn now.”

Now, onto your more serious point;

Given God’s power and all, can someone spell out a persuasive, coherent line of reasoning for why God needed to actually impregnate Mary instead of just creating a new, improved Adam from clay (Adam 2.0) or just revealing his nature and plans to a regular human being (imagine Moses multiplied times ten)?

Those options would have avoided a number of weird issues, like what if Mary had said no - would she have gone to Hell? Would Gabriel have kept asking around til he found a girl to say yes? If Mary believed it was GOD, how could she answer without duress? If she didn’t believe it was GOD, then why in the world would she consent? Etc. I’m not trying to sort all those out, so don’t let me distract from the main question. I’m just establishing context.

If it’s just another one of those mysteries, then fine; I don’t need you to tell me that. I’m also down with how I should have more faith all around, so don’t need reminders of that either. I’m curious about ways to make sense out of it within the limits of reason.

Thanks for joining in and sharing your insights!

Adam 2.0: I think the reason God didn’t go this route is because He wanted to save humanity, not replace it. Also, what kind of role model would Christ be if He had been (essentially) a non-human? It would give the image that ‘well, that’s something I’d never be able to do; so why bother trying?’.

Noah 2.0: I think God has tried this approach before. The entire Old Testament is loaded with vibrant visible displays of God’s power and sheer epicness (think wizard of Oz from the classic movie, without looking behind the curtain of course). And yet, time after time after time, Israel turned away.

 

[pianistclare]

Neither Adam or Moses were divine to start with.

 

[Neoplatonist]

Quick side note; got a big LOL on this one.
Gabriel: “Greetings Jane, you are favored of the Lord #3,183. The first 3,182 turned him down, so its your turn now.”

Now, onto your more serious point;

Adam 2.0: I think the reason God didn’t go this route is because He wanted to save humanity, not replace it. Also, what kind of role model would Christ be if He had been (essentially) a non-human? It would give the image that ‘well, that’s something I’d never be able to do; so why bother trying?’.

Noah 2.0: I think God has tried this approach before. The entire Old Testament is loaded with vibrant visible displays of God’s power and sheer epicness (think wizard of Oz from the classic movie, without looking behind the curtain of course). And yet, time after time after time, Israel turned away.

But Adam was human, right? Why wouldn’t the next one God made (working with infinite intellect and infinite power) be human as well?

Right, that’s why he needs to do a bigger, better (now with extra miracle action grip) version. Besides, people turn away from Christ all the time, too.

 

[Neoplatonist]

Neither Adam or Moses were divine to start with.

1. Don’t misunderstand, but: so? I mean why is that the only way to do what needed to be done?
2. God could breathe divinity into Mary’s womb, but couldn’t have breathed it into a new Adam? Or, better yet, maybe realizing He messed up last time, God builds a woman from clay instead (thus she would be free from original sin, etc., etc.,) and breathes divinity into that vessel instead.

 

[Timothysis]

Given God’s power and all, can someone spell out a persuasive, coherent line of reasoning for why God needed to actually impregnate Mary instead of just creating a new, improved Adam from clay (Adam 2.0) or just revealing his nature and plans to a regular human being (imagine Moses multiplied times ten)?

Those options would have avoided a number of weird issues, like what if Mary had said no - would she have gone to Hell? Would Gabriel have kept asking around til he found a girl to say yes? If Mary believed it was GOD, how could she answer without duress? If she didn’t believe it was GOD, then why in the world would she consent? Etc. I’m not trying to sort all those out, so don’t let me distract from the main question. I’m just establishing context.

If it’s just another one of those mysteries, then fine; I don’t need you to tell me that. I’m also down with how I should have more faith all around, so don’t need reminders of that either. I’m curious about ways to make sense out of it within the limits of reason.

Thanks for joining in and sharing your insights!

Quite honestly, you obviously do not know or understand what the Church teaches if you ask such questions. These are basically Catholicism 101 questions. God gave us his only begotten Son, who is consubstantial with the Father, as a sacrifice for the sins of mankind out of his love for us. He gave Himself, not just another man. God bestowed the singular grace of the Immaculate Conception upon Mary because he knew that her answer would be “yes.” God didn’t just tell Gabriel to ask around until he found one who agreed. Our entire faith rests on the perfect obedience of Jesus and his mother Mary. They didn’t do what they did because God “made” them do it but out of perfect love and obedience to God.

 

[Neoplatonist]

Quite honestly, you obviously do not know or understand what the Church teaches if you ask such questions. These are basically Catholicism 101 questions. God gave us his only begotten Son, who is consubstantial with the Father, as a sacrifice for the sins of mankind out of his love for us. He gave Himself, not just another man. God bestowed the singular grace of the Immaculate Conception upon Mary because he knew that her answer would be “yes.” God didn’t just tell Gabriel to ask around until he found one who agreed. Our entire faith rests on the perfect obedience of Jesus and his mother Mary. They didn’t do what they did because God “made” them do it but out of perfect love and obedience to God.

lol. Why on earth would anyone be on here asking anything if they already understood it? Seriously. [smh]

What I do not see in your reply is an explanation of why it needed to be a God-impregnated woman. Could God not have sent Christ directly to be crucified?

Could he not have similarly known in advance that his fresh-from-clay Eve 2.0 would say, “Yes” (and, as a bonus, creating symmetry with the first Eve’s error)?

Or any of countless other possibilities . . .

 

[pianistclare]

lol. Why on earth would anyone be on here asking anything if they already understood it? Seriously. [smh]

What I do not see in your reply is an explanation of why it needed to be a God-impregnated woman. Could God not have sent Christ directly to be crucified?

Could he not have similarly known in advance that his fresh-from-clay Eve 2.0 would say, “Yes” (and, as a bonus, creating symmetry with the first Eve’s error)?

Or any of countless other possibilities . . .

Because if it had been done ANY other way, all of us would fall back on “God, you just don’t understand me. You’re perfect and you don’t understand what it’s like to be a frail human being.”

It’s the most amazing gift of LOVE that God chose to take the form of man, for our salvation. People are skeptical…God chose to take human form and walk among us. Emmanuel.
God with us.

 

[Neoplatonist]

Because if it had been done ANY other way, all of us would fall back on “God, you just don’t understand me. You’re perfect and you don’t understand what it’s like to be a frail human being.”

It’s the most amazing gift of LOVE that God chose to take the form of man, for our salvation. People are skeptical…God chose to take human form and walk among us. Emmanuel.
God with us.

Interesting point, but why was impregnating a woman the only possible way for an infinite intellect with infinite power to become human?

Besides, you open up the question: why would showing us he understood what it was like to be us the only way to motivate us to learn and grow? There are an infinite number of ways to teach and motivate - especially if you are divine - by helping them see the steps to get what they want, or show them proof that behavior A creates achievement B or general happiness. (At no point in my teaching career have I ever gotten a child to grasp a concept or change a behavior by making them realize I used to be a child.)

On a slightly entertaining note, I must admit that it never occurred to me that Tron might be an allegory.

 

[pianistclare]

Interesting point, but why was impregnating a woman the only possible way for an infinite intellect with infinite power to become human?

On a slightly entertaining note, I must admit that it never occurred to me that Tron might be an allegory.

It’s not the only possible way. But God desires a relationship with us.
And, He was to be born of the line of David.
Check out the OT scripture prophesies.
There were Covenants with God and the chosen people. Clearly a history of wanting “relationship”.

 

[Neoplatonist]

It’s not the only possible way. But God desires a relationship with us.
And, He was to be born of the line of David.
Check out the OT scripture prophesies.
There were Covenants with God and the chosen people. Clearly a history of wanting “relationship”.

But was Mary in the line of David, or was it Joseph? I suppose it matters little, 'cause that just makes me wonder why God would be bound (even voluntarily) by biological models of hereditary kingship.

Did God not have a relationship with Adam and Eve, then, or Moses?

 

[Timothysis]

What I do not see in your reply is an explanation of why it needed to be a God-impregnated woman. Could God not have sent Christ directly to be crucified?

Could he not have similarly known in advance that his fresh-from-clay Eve 2.0 would say, “Yes” (and, as a bonus, creating symmetry with the first Eve’s error)?

Or any of countless other possibilities . . .

The answer to these questions is the same as the question in regards to the pile of laundry that is sitting on the floor in front my washing machine. All I have to do is put them in, add washing powder and turn it on, but it just ain’t happening that way.

Honestly, in the attempt to sound intelligent and enlightened you are basically asking why didn’t God do something the way YOU think He should have. You sound to be doubtful of just what God can and can’t do. Ultimately, it is a mystery but I think that you would do well to give God enough credit to know what He is doing.

 

[pianistclare]

But was Mary in the line of David, or was it Joseph? I suppose it matters little, 'cause that just makes me wonder why God would be bound (even voluntarily) by biological models of hereditary kingship.

There’s a thorough explanation on NewAdvent.org
newadvent.org/cathen/06410a.htm

and this from CAF Apologists:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=737434

Of course God is not bound by anything. But you have to consider the audience. They were told something, and they expect to to happen. God doesn’t lie.
God is the one keeper of promises.

 

[KP3243]

I assume that you don’t see all the Old Testament typology for both Jesus and Mary and how incredibly well thought out and beautifully planned our salvation was. My favorite typology is the that Mary is the New Ark of the Covenant.

 

[Neoplatonist]

The answer to these questions is the same as the question in regards to the pile of laundry that is sitting on the floor in front my washing machine. All I have to do is put them in, add washing powder and turn it on, but it just ain’t happening that way.

Honestly, in the attempt to sound intelligent and enlightened you are basically asking why didn’t God do something the way YOU think He should have. You sound to be doubtful of just what God can and can’t do. Ultimately, it is a mystery but I think that you would do well to give God enough credit to know what He is doing.

1.A mystery. Right. Thought I was pretty clear about the value of that answer in my OP.

2.I’m not “trying to sound” anything except curious.

 

[KP3243]

What I do not see in your reply is an explanation of why it needed to be a God-impregnated woman. Could God not have sent Christ directly to be crucified?​

You do realize Jesus is the second person in the blessed trinity and is God. In his humanity sanctifies every aspect of ours. He also started a Church for the rest of us and needed to teach people about it.

 

[Neoplatonist]

I assume that you don’t see all the Old Testament typology for both Jesus and Mary and how incredibly well thought out and beautifully planned our salvation was. My favorite typology is the that Mary is the New Ark of the Covenant.

Admittedly no, I don’t see how the weirdness of God impregnating a human woman is as beautiful as perhaps I should. That’s why I’m trying to understand it.

Would not Eve 2.0 have been a new A of the C? Are there not infinitely other beautiful ways our salvation could have unfolded?

I can believe that God found this the most beautiful way, but that doesn’t mean I understand it. To the extent that we can, I’m trying to understand why this would be the most beautiful way (in spite of the seeming weirdness).

 

[pianistclare]

Admittedly no, I don’t see how the weirdness of God impregnating a human woman is as beautiful as perhaps I should. That’s why I’m trying to understand it.

Would not Eve 2.0 have been a new A of the C? Are there not infinitely other beautiful ways our salvation could have unfolded?

I can believe that God found this the most beautiful way, but that doesn’t mean I understand it. To the extent that we can, I’m trying to understand why this would be the most beautiful way (in spite of the seeming weirdness).

I’m guessing you don’t have kids…

 

[Neoplatonist]

I’m guessing you don’t have kids…

lol. Poor guess. If my wife were only 1/1,000,000 th my intellect, age, maturity, etc., we had never never dated, and I just used some procedure to appear my child inside her, it would be weird.

If I created some lower biological life form in the lab, loved it dearly, and implanted my seed inside it, how would that NOT be weird?

(Add in that she’s married to someone else and after my impregnation, she would never be able to have sex, and could never have any other children, nor would he.) I realize that comparison is weird though, since he is also only 1/1,000,000th my intellect, age, maturity, etc. - basically another lower biological life form in my lab.

 

[pianistclare]

lol. Poor guess. If my wife were only 1/1,000,000 th my intellect, age, maturity, etc., we had never never dated, and I just used some procedure to appear my child inside her, it would be weird.

If I created some lower biological life form in the lab, loved it dearly, and implanted my seed inside it, how would that NOT be weird?

OK. I guess I just don’t understand how anyone can think that God is “weird”.
Maybe that’s the real question.
God bless you. Hope you find answers that are not too weird.

Much of the OT stuff could be classified as weird. This was over 2000 years ago.
I imagine they would conceive cell phones as pretty weird, but it’s our norm.