What Bastard Child Is This?

Note: the issue is not what the jews thought nor the supernatural nature/condition and authority of God over all things or Jesus but simply the conditions of the physical and natural/ human birth of the human child Jesus who is among other things considered “the son of man”; as a “son of man”, the condition/ under what condition is his birth.

Some would like to try to define a bastard as being a son of a human man and women but this is just an attemtp to avoid the issue of the nature of ones offspring, for even the supernatural angles that came into the daughters of men and had sons as well and that has nothing to do with the status of those sons born regarudless of if they were considered illegitimate/bastards or not. The point being that the issue of what constitutes a bastard/ illegitimate child hinges not on if the father is human or not but rather on personhood; that is to say one person fathers a son outside the condition of the wedlock. The nature of the father is irrelevant as to the nature or condition of the birth of the son. If the son is a different person then his the father, then Jesus is the bastard child of that some other person who is his father out of wedlock. Marry was not the wife of God but she is the mother of Jesus. If Jesus father is a different person then the son as the trinitarians claim then the birth of Christ is that of a bastard child and not a legitimate son . The issue is not whether or not God is supernatural or that the son is of supernatural origin but the fact that one person who is God interjects a different person into the human world to be a human son is born a bastards birth since his father is not married to his mother. God is not coming down to earth interacting with man as a supernatural God but rather interacting with man as a man and “the son of man”. As such, since the father is not married to the women who gives birth to him then the “son of man” is born a bastards birth. There is no doubt that God is “supernatural” and above all things but the issue is that God comes down to man as a ma; the issue is the humanity and nature of the son, the legitimacy of the son, not the supernatural nature of some other father person or of his own divine nature, the issue is the nature and legitimacy of his human nature. God (who is so great and powerful) could have taken or just claimed Marry as His own wife so as to give this “son of man” legitimacy to his birth (so that there could be no claim to a father who is not in wedlock to his mother) but choose instead to send a son born a bastard’s birth a “son of man” (according to the nature of men) to save us from our sins and release us from the bonds of our iniquity.

However, If the same person who is the son is also the father then natural relationship of a father and his legitimate/illegitimate son have no coherent relevance in meaning since father and son are just roles/modes/parts/titles of the same person in different circumstances. In any case there is no way nor has there ever been any consideration so as to consider one person to be the bastard son of himself where as the opposite case (where one person fathers a son who is not married to the mother of the son) demands it by definition.

You can’t have it both ways in that the son and father are divine and thus exempt from human conditions, since it is for the express purpose of coming in the flesh and living a perfect sinless life under the law that the “son of man” comes not as a god but as a man in the human condition, under the authority of man, under the authority of the law and of human nature. That was the reason he was tempted in all points like as we are and yet without sin. While it is true only God could do that (live sinless with all the temptation) he never the less had to endure the humanity of his condition and it is that condition that comes into question when we consider that this son of man’s father was not married to his mother and as such born a bastard/ illegitimate birth if this nonsense about the father being a different person then his son is held.

Again, modalism does not suffer such ridiculous self incriminations because there is no coherent natural relationship between father, mother and son since father and son are the same person and there is no natural way nor has there ever been to consider one person the bastard child of himself. Indeed there is no natural way to consider one a son of himslef and this is in some great part a puch line in modalism. What constitues the son in modalism is virtue of the fact that (1) God defines his own right arm would be his son [in possesion not person] (2) what was born was male human flesh the son of Marry, “the son of man” and further, the son “of God” (son of the father) is solely a reference to ownership of that “son of man” and NOT a reference to a son that has a natural nature. (son a different person then his father) There can be no such claim of any kind of “supernatural exemption” for the trinitarian “son of man” since that person is naturally without any legitimate birth from another person who is his father because his father is not married to the women who gives that son. While the father may be supernatural that fact does not change the natural status of the birth of this “son of man” who is born into the natural world as a man. It is his birth and himself subject to human nature that is in question not the nature of his father.

Jesus Claimed to be the father and the father claimed that the servant sent would be HIMSELF and NOT another person.

-JOHN 14: 8-20 ….[Note Isaiah 9:6. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: …: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, … the everlasting Father; 22:21.. and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. 22. And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open./Rev 3:7] ….The son, father/Holy Spirit are all the same person, certainly NOT like two different persons working together even as “one flesh” ….The “oneness” between Christ and the father is not comparable to a man & his wife, for only a fool would say “When you have seen me you have seen my wife, how sayest thou then, Shew us your wife?”

Notice they asked to see THE FATHER and the response was Jn 14:9 ..“HAVE I BEEN SO LONG time with you, and yet hast THOU NOT KNOW ME, Philip…..Now image some fool trying to claim that statement if you asked to see his wife!?!!? You want to see the FATHER but have I been with you but you don’t know me!?!?!
Jn 14 continued….…………..17. Even THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH; (Jn 14:6 I AM the way, THE TRUTH,) whom the world cannot receive, .. for HE DEWLLETH WITH YOU, (present tense/standing next to them in the flesh) and SHALL BE IN YOU… (future tense “In them”) 18. I will not leave you comfortless: I WILL COME TO YOU (future tense “In them”) Jesus himself here makes the point that the same person who was the HOLY SPIRIT that would come was standing next to them but lets them know “I will come to you again to be Inside of you”

Isaiah 43:10.Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and MY(the person who is going to send someone) SERVANT WHOM I (The one sending) HAVE CHOSEN: that ye may KNOW and BELIEVE me, and UNDERSTAND that I AM HE: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. 11. I, even I, am the Lord; and BESIDE ME THERE IS NO SAVIOUR… 13. Yea, before the day was I AM HE; (THE servant that will be sent/Jesus) …………………. Take careful note of the fact that the Same person who is speaking in this passage, who states he is going to be sending his servant is claiming that HE is that servant that will b sent

Isaiah 48:12. Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I AM HE; I AM THE FIRST, I ALSO AM THE LAST. 13. MINE HAND ALSO HATH LAID THE FOUNDATION of the earth, and MY RIGHT HAND hath spanned the heavens: … THE LORD HATH LOVED HIM: (His own right arm is the “HIM” that he have loved!: Jn 17:5,24-26; 15:9; ) … and HIS ARM SHALL BE on the Chaldeans. 15…, I have called HIM: I have brought HIM, and he shall make HIS way prosperous.

Isaiah 52:1. .. 6.Therefore MY PEOPLE SHALL KNOW MY NAME: therefore they shall know IN THAT DAY that I AM HE that doth speak: behold, IT IS I. 7. HOW BEAUTIFUL UPON THE MOUNTAINS ARE THE FEET OF HIM THAT BRINGETH GOOD TIDINGS,….. 10. THE LORD HATH MADE BARE HIS HOLY ARM IN THE EYES OF ALL THE NATIONS;

Isaiah 53: 1. … and to whom is THE ARM OF THE LORD REVEALED?……………8. … he was cut off out of the land of the living: FOR THE TRANSGRESSION OF MY PEOPLE WAS HE STRICKEN. .. 11. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall MY RIGHTEOUS SERVANT JUSTIFY MANY; for he shall bear their iniquities. 12. ….. and HE BARE THE SIN OF MANY, AND MADE INTERCESSION FOR THE TRANSGRESSORS.

You can download the complete book FREE from
https://www.scribd.com/doc/305367608/The-Trinity-Heresy
https://www.academia.edu/23463667/THE_TRINITY_HERESY
http://www.globethics.net/gtl/10920799