• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured Jesus died as a 21 year old(moved from Traditional Theology)

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by AlexDTX, Oct 2, 2016.

  1. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,296
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    I have been thinking about this for some time and would love everyone's feedback. All the pictures of Jesus I have seen painted always portray him as a 33 year old, and I believe this is incorrect.

    Science tells me that it takes 7 years for every cell in the body to be replaced. In the first 3 cycles of 7 years we see the transformation of a infant to child; child to teen, and teen to adult. After 21 the growth process ends and the 7 year cycles are to replace the cells.

    I realized when I first understood this that this is the reason we age. Because of sin in us our bodies do not replicate the cells exactly right and are a little off. Similar to a copy machine making copies of copies you get a deterioration in picture quality that eventually no longer looks like the first picture. Likewise with us; with each passing cycle of 7 years we age and look older until the cycle is so far off we die of natural causes.

    Even with children growing to adulthood the effect of sin on their bodies is evident with blemishes, pimples, moles, etc. They just are not as noticeable due to the extreme changes occurring with their maturation.

    But not so with Jesus. He was sinless from birth. Therefore he never had pimples or any other blemish, nor any sickness. When he reached twenty one, the next 7 year cycle would have perfectly replaced their cells, so at 28 he still looked 21. Likewise when he died at 33, five years into his next 7 year cycle, he would have still looked 21.

    If God still uses this system when we get our glorified bodies, then we will all look 21 for ever.

    BTW, as a side note, if men can say they are women trapped in a man's body, I think I am a 21 year old trapped in a 63 year old body, and I should get special rights ;).

    Ammendment to Post
    Oct 11, 2016

    I apparently began this thread in the wrong forum. I did not realize that Traditional Theology was limited and my post would be considered controversial. Indeed, I have been called a heretic by a couple responders.

    My intention in posting the topic was to get feed back. Thank you everyone for your feed back, including those who disagree and called me a heretic. Iron sharpens iron, and I have much to consider. Some brought up points that caused me to reconsider my idea. One pointed out that the brain does not fully mature until 25, and another considered the entrance of puberty as maturation. I acknowledged that the virgin Mary might have been a teen between 13 and 15 when she consented for he Holy Spirit to come upon her so she could birth Jesus.

    Another commentor thought my idea interesting but what was the point? What benefit to us now does this have? I understand the idea is an academic idea. As I told another, apart from the deity and humanity of Christ coming to redeem us and our need to realize that we are sinners in need of salvation so the Holy Spirit may enter us and give us the new birth, everything else is academic.

    Of course, we need to understand and apply those practical elements of our faith -walking humbly with our God, leaning not on our own understanding, but trusting him while forgiving and loving others - for our discipleship.

    I have been ruminating on an idea, of which the idea of sin causing aging through slight error in replication of the cells is one part of this larger idea. The larger idea I am thinking about is what righteous living means. Jesus obeyed all the laws of God, not just the Mosaic laws, but the laws of nature in the physical world, as well as the laws of the spirit from the spiritual world. He did so by only doing what his Father led him to do.

    I think that part of our discipleship now in this fallen world is to learn how to do the same so that we obey all the physical and spiritual laws of creation. I think it is possible in the New Heaven and Earth that we will live the same way with the potential of harm if we disregard that leading.

    Thank you again, everyone for your feedback. I have taken everyone's comments to heart in serious considerations.
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2016
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. ImaginaryDay

    ImaginaryDay We Live Here

    +703
    Canada
    Protestant
    Separated
    CA-Conservatives
    No thanks. 21 wasn't a good time for me. :D
     
  3. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +19,487
    Anglican
    Married
    Every theologian I'm familiar with seems to disagree with this. Jesus was a complete human and is believed, therefore, to have "had" everything that any other human male would have had--except, of course, for sin.
     
  4. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,296
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    Correct. He was a fully, sinless, human. In other words he was a perfect human, just as Adam and Eve were before they fell. Remember that the sacrificial lamb of the OT could not have any spot or blemish. Aging as we know it is from sin. He had no sin, therefore, I believe he did not age.
     
  5. Harfelugan

    Harfelugan Newbie

    137
    +43
    Pentecostal
    Married
    Was Jesus in his full humanness perfect in the sense you seem to be implying? Would sinlessness in a human qualify that person to be a perfect sacrifice? Surely then an infant would meet the requirement if you concede that no sin is imputed to them until a knowledge of sin. Why not sacrifice them? Because sinlessness is only part of the requirement of God. Christ was born of a woman of the seed of fallen Adam. Does that rule out inherited human sin in that he had no human father? Fully human, yet without sin. Absolutely!

    I'm thinking the answer we're looking for is wrapped up in incarnational mystery. That fully human means like humans in nature and current temporal condition. That Christ, "The Son of Man" saved humanity by entering into humanity as we are in our current fallen state, but without personal sin. Not saving us from a position high above us but of equality with us. Suffering as we do, experiencing life just like us.

    It would be no big deal if an Almighty God became just an Almighty Man and saved a fallen race of men. There's no incarnational mystery there. But if an Almighty God becomes a member of the fallen race of humanity and saves mankind through that existence, leaving us the incarnational mystery, that is a big deal. Isaiah describes Christ as nothing special in appearance, not as a being of human perfection, as if he lived as a perfect physical human specimen that never aged past 21 years. But I could be mistaken, I know I'm not perfect.
     
  6. SnowyMacie

    SnowyMacie Well-Known Member

    +5,926
    United States
    Anglican
    In Relationship
    The seven years thing is just an average, you have completely new red blood cells about every four months, new skin every two to three weeks, while some brain cells never die as long as the person is living.
     
  7. ~Anastasia~

    ~Anastasia~ † Servant of God † Supporter CF Senior Ambassador

    +14,891
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    I don't mean this to be rude, but would it matter if Christ had the appearance of a 21-year-old or a 33-year-old when He was crucified?

    There is the matter that a very young man would not be as respected by others. Timothy apparently had problems due to his youth. And we know do at least that He was bearded.

    There is also the fact that He received His human flesh from the Virgin Mary. Catholics, with their doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, would be somewhat similar in their thinking, since the Virgin Mary was supposed to be completely preserved from any stain from "Original Sin". But as Orthodox, it is crucial for us that the Virgin Mary was of the same human flesh as the rest of us, and that it was truly human flesh the same as the rest of us have that Christ assumed. So while it is true that He never sinned, he would still suffer tiredness, pain, temptation, and essentially everything else that is part of the human condition - perhaps pimples too.

    But the pimples are something I think it simply would not occur to us to even speculate on. I don't think we know, and I don't think in terms of our theology that it would matter. But what DOES matter to us is that Christ truly took on human flesh.

    Must say, I've never heard that thought before. :)
     
  8. All4Christ

    All4Christ ✙ The Handmaid of God Laura ✙ Supporter CF Senior Ambassador

    +6,006
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    Aging is a consequence of the original sin, not a result of sin we commit. Obviously Jesus did age some (He was born as a baby!). Aging is a part of humanity which Jesus experienced like all other humans. He lived a perfect life and was free from sin, but his human body still suffered the consequences we all experience as a result of the fall.

    Besides - 33 is still in the prime of our lifetime! It's not an "old" age. [emoji4]
     
  9. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +19,487
    Anglican
    Married
    ...but he did 'age' for 21 years, according to your theory. And if he did not age beyond that, he wouldn't be a real human.

    Besides, the Bible itself gives a strong indication that the "21 only" theory isn't correct. Do you remember that some of Jesus' critics said to him that he was a young man not yet 50 years old? Surely, no one would use that benchmark to describe a 21 year old. Jesus' public ministry began (according to the Bible) in the 15th year of the reign of the Emperor Tiberius. And the events involving Pontius Pilate, also a known Roman figure whom we can place in time, would also make the "21 only" theory wrong.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2016
  10. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,296
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    This discussion is becoming great and I appreciate your thoughtful answer. My understanding of Jesus the Christ seems to be different from others. Jesus was fully human and fully divine. What that means to me is that Jesus incarnated the fullness of the Godhead (Col. 2:9), i.e., what we call the Father, the Word and the Spirit dwelt in him bodily; and as a fully human man he had a created spirit, soul, and body.

    As a fully human man he had no sin nature, which apparently is passed on by the human father, not by the mother, hence the virgin birth. No sin nature means he was not born into sin as we are, therefore was not sinner at birth. To say he could have been sacrificed as a baby misses the need to prove the creation good. In other words, that God's original creation of Adam and Eve was perfect and could have resisted the temptation in the Garden of Eden. The 33 years of Jesus's life proved the creation good, even to the point of dying on the cross for our sins. This is our justification. We are justified by his works, not ours. As Paul told the Romans, by one man (Adam) all were made sinners, but by one man (Jesus) all are made righteous (Rom. 5:12 - 19).

    I believe it is important to understand the humanity of Christ. We were not saved by his deity, but his humanity. His deity was the guarantee for his humanity, but it was the humanity that agreed to "become sin who knew no sin" (2 Cor. 5:21) on the cross of Calvary. I also believe that the divinity had to leave Christ, not because he could not be in the presence of sin, but because it is impossible for sin to come upon God. Without God's departure from the man, it would have been impossible for Jesus to have died.

    I think we project our own fallen condition upon Jesus as a man. He was perfect and sinless. I don't believe aging as we know it was part of the plan of God. It is the result of sin for sin creates death (James 1:15). Maturing is not the same thing as aging. Aging is the gradual manifestation of death that is already in us at birth. This would not have happened to Jesus if he did not accept our sins upon himself on the cross.
     
  11. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,296
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    Your point about the average is valid. Nonetheless, it does not change my point.
     
  12. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,296
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    I respectfully disagree with your thinking that aging and maturing are the same thing. Maturation from baby to adult ends, but aging continues after adulthood. To think he experienced the sufferings of our fallen bodies during his lifetime is to misunderstand the impact of the cross. The word, "knew" in the statement that He who knew no sin became sin (2 Cor. 5:21) does not mean "understand" but "experienced" as in Adam "knew" his wife Eve. I do not believe that Jesus experienced sin until the cross. The suffering of Christ on the cross was more than the scourging and crucifixion; it was his becoming sin. At that point he experienced everything we experienced: depression, anxiety, sickness and disease. In his resurrection he was purged of all these things but he still remembers them which is what makes him our high priest between God and man.
     
  13. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,296
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    Hi Albion. As I have pointed out to other comments: maturing and aging are not synonyms. As fallen humanity we make that confusion since we see growing up as changing to growing out, but I do not believe this is the case. I believe aging is the gradual process of death being manifested, whereas maturing is the process of changing from infant to adult.

    I do not argue that Jesus was 21 when he was crucified, only that he looked 21. He had lived 33 years before the cross. As for his critics, I think 50 years old was a mark of having lived life long enough to have wisdom. To his critics he was clearly younger than that so they could not believe had had experienced life long enough to have the wisdom he had shared. In the context of the dialogue, the Jews knew being 50 years old was not old enough to have seen Abraham who lived 2,000 years before their time.
     
  14. All4Christ

    All4Christ ✙ The Handmaid of God Laura ✙ Supporter CF Senior Ambassador

    +6,006
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    I believe our difference in understanding is due to our views on Original Sin. In my tradition (the Orthodox Church) we believe that there are personal sins that we experience, and ancestral sin - which does not have guilt associated to it. Just as the world was corrupted, humanity was corrupted by the result of that sin. In other words, sickness, pain, etc. An example of Jesus experiencing pain was when Lazarus died. He wept then. Did this pain mean he was sinning? No, of course not. Rather, death was entered into this world through that first sin. He allowed himself to experience the same difficulties we experience, while avoiding all sin.

    Do you believe we are born with personal guilt - which causes us to experience pain, sickness, aging, etc.? If so, why does the world outside of humanity also suffer from corruption? Is the world guilty of sin? Are animals guilty? No, of course not. The result of sin - corruption of this world - impacts us all. However, that in and of itself is not personal sin. Rather, it is experiencing the fall-out of that original sin.

    Also, you seem to separate Jesus' humanity and divinity. From the earliest times of the church, Jesus was considered fully human and fully divine - not composed of two parts. We can't separate the two because He is fully human and fully divine.

    One more thought - Jesus did experience grief when he was in the Garden of Gethsemene. He did experience emotional pain there.

    Another thought - adulthood was not 21 years of age in Biblical times. It was much younger than that. Upon a person's bar mitzvah or bat mitzvah, he / she was spiritually considered to be an adult. That same age standard occurs today in Judaism.
     
  15. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,296
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    As a general comment to all viewing this post: does anyone actually believe that if Jesus did not die on the cross that he would have aged like we do becoming gray and feeble losing his hair and eventually dying? I don't think so.
     
  16. ~Anastasia~

    ~Anastasia~ † Servant of God † Supporter CF Senior Ambassador

    +14,891
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    There is another problem we would have theologically with separating the divinity of Christ from Jesus so that he could take on sin and die. As A4C said, we do not believe it is possible to divide the natures of Christ (separate one from another). But more importantly, it is in the very death of God Himself through which death is destroyed, and that model of the atonement (Christus Victor) is a much older one and was widely embraced by the early Church.

    If God as a man did not die, then there is no hope for death to be defeated, and we would all remain in a psuedo-hades realm after we die on this earth.
     
  17. ImaginaryDay

    ImaginaryDay We Live Here

    +703
    Canada
    Protestant
    Separated
    CA-Conservatives
    The problem is that you're relying on some absolutes that don't work well in reality. If "science tells you..." things, you should also know that science is not exact. It is made of theories that can inform us of what may be, but make no claims about truth. So, what you've said may be valid, but not necessarily true. (btw, if science tells you this, can you show me the science?).

    You've also said that age and maturation are different concepts, but this is only somewhat correct. If we follow your theory above, then age and maturation should be in line with one another. If the growth process ends at age 21, this would take into account the brain also. Science, however, gives us an average age of about 25 years for the brain to be fully developed (grown). During this period, the person is still learning to reason, think, control emotion, etc. Some as a result of the developing (i.e. 'growing') brain. The problem, then, with absolutes, is that they are not absolutely true in all cases.
     
  18. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,296
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    There is no disagreement that Jesus experienced emotions. I do not consider emotions to be sin. Jesus wept, but not because Lazarus died, for he knew that Lazarus would be resurrected at his Word. He wept because he has compassion on the grief that his family bore. Yes, he was tempted in all ways without sinning.

    Your question is strange. Are you saying, do I believe we are all born with a sense of personal guilt because we all know in our hearts that we are sinners? If so, yes and no. I believe we all know in our hearts that we are sinners, but I think guilt is something we become conscious of as we get older. Do animals sin? Yes, they do. I believe this is why Israel was commanded to kill every living thing - man and animal- when they entered Caanan. In fact, I believe all creation is permeated with sin (called entropy in physics0 which is why there will be a new heaven and earth in the end.

    Yes, I do, but more as an academic understanding than a practical one. This is the same as Hebrews telling us that the Word of God is sharper than any two edged sword able to divide asunder soul and spirit (Heb. 4:12). I am amazed by the number of people in this forum who think the soul and the spirit are the same thing. So, too, with Jesus, his humanity and his divinity are one. Consider the doctrine of the Trinity. Are there 3 gods? God the Father, God the Son, and God the Spirit? Yes and no. Each person in the godhead has its own identity, but they all make up the one God that is God. Jesus was the exact expression of God in his humanity, and was God before his incarnation, but his incarnation created the second Adam, who was fully human. And it is this human that justifies us and saves us, not the divinity. The Word that became flesh and is divine did not become sin. But the flesh that was the Word did.

    Of course he did. But as stated earlier, this emotional pain is not sin, nor do I make that claim.

    This is an excellent point. I don't know if this is a biblical command of God in the TANAK or if this is just rabbinic tradition. I will need to research that further. Thank you for bringing this up. This is why I wanted feed back. However, at this point, I still lean towards 21 since that is the third cycle of 7. Creation science points out that the world is made up of a myriad of triads which reflects the Trinity. One thing that you did not bring up, which occurred to me after reading your comment regards the virgin Mary. It is likely that Mary was a mere 13 or 14 years old when the Holy Spirit came upon her to conceive Jesus. God never violates the will of anyone. Her consent indicates that she was of an adult age to agree upon this conception. So your point still stands and I thank you again for making it.
     
  19. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,296
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    It is impossible for God to die. He is life. He has no beginning nor can he have an end. The death was in the man, who was the exact replication in the flesh of God. This is why Jesus, the man, cried out on the cross, My God, My God why have you forsaken me? God can not become sin. He can not die. It was the man only that became sin and died.

    Does that mean God was untouched? No. When the Jesus was resurrected the Spirit of God returned into him and through the man, God was both touched and knows death through that man's experience.
     
  20. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,296
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    Good points, ID. I agree that human science is weak in that they limit their understanding to merely the 5 senses, and make assumptions about creation that disregards God, sin, and the spiritual world of angels, demons and human spirits. However, Jesus, the author of true science which encompasses the entire creation came not only to save us as sinners, but to redeem the entire creation, which is why there will be a new heaven and a new earth in the end.

    Overcoming death is to overcome the flaw that sin brought into creation. Redemption is the correction of that scientific reality we all know as death.

    Your point regarding the brain is another good point. Perhaps fully maturity is 28, the fourth cycle of 7, and not 21. But it is also possible that environmental and sociological factors are retarding brain development today. I read the history of American Industrial revolution. Back in the turn of the 20th century, when children were used in factories and child labors laws were enacted to remove them from factories, teen-agers when to work instead. This created a competition for work with the adults who needed the work. From that time a distinction was made between teens and adults as a youth group to justify excluding them from work.

    My point is that we are seeing the infantilization of adults so that more and more people, especially men, are maturing later and later. So the full development of the brain around 25 may be an unnatural retardation that did not exist before. But I don't know, just thinking out loud.
     
Loading...