Divine Blood, Part 2

Let's pick up where we left off several days ago and look at the problems with the doctrine of the divine blood of Christ. I will not be dealing with the so-called scientific evidence, which I believe is misinformation, because for those of us who hold the scripture as the foundation for any doctrine, whether the theory has scientific support is largely irrelevant. What matters most of all is whether the theory can be supported by the text of scripture. So, what does scripture tell us about whether Jesus had blood that was not human, but divine?

It's interesting that those who hold this doctrine dear to them see it as the only way that Christ's death could mean anything for them. It's the only way, according to this view, that there could be help for them in the atonement Christ made. Scripture, however, seems to say something that is exactly opposite of this:

Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives. For assuredly He does not give help to angels, but He gives help to the descendant of Abraham. Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For since He Himself was tempted in that which He has suffered, He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted. (Hebrews 2:14-18)

According to these verses, it is because Christ was like us (shared our same flesh and blood) that His death had power for us. It is because He identified himself fully with us, or as the text says--He was like us in every way, even to the point of being tempted as we are--that we can be identified with Him in his death, and He can serve as our priest and make propitiation to God on our behalf. Christ had to become fully human in order for His death to aid us, and His death does not aid those, like the fallen angels, with whom He did become identical. There is no doubt in my mind that if the cells of Christ's blood were to be DNA typed, the DNA would be human DNA, for if they were not human cells, then Christ was not like me in all things. And if the Christ I have put my faith in is not like me in all things, including the full humanness of the blood flowing in His veins, then He is powerless to help me in my greatest need as a human being--freedom from my slavery to sin and the death that comes as the just consequence of that sin.

What do those two texts used to support the divine blood theory really mean, if they don't mean that Christ's blood was not human like ours? I hope to look at each one of them in my next post.