If I'm understanding, the question being asked is where the idea that Jesus is human comes from, because of the obvious elements of the narratives that ascribe divinity to him. I'm just copy pasting from my trinity thread, but I would suggest for the early church the idea of the humanity of Christ was tied to its understanding of salvation as the deification of human nature. So scripturally:
"For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh" (Romans 8:2)
"Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people." (Heb 2:14-17)
"His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire." (2 Peter 1:3-4)
There is a particular view of salvation (or a certain logic) presupposed in the words "Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect" in Hebrews. In the formulation of the orthodox christological doctrine (That in Christ there is both a Divine and Human nature, joined without change, confusion, separation, or division) that logic was particularly emphasized by the Greek church fathers, where the argument was about whether, beyond having taken on a human body, Christ also had a human mind and soul. In other words, whether Jesus is really human. Gregory Nazianzen writes, following a similar logic as those N.T. passages:
"If anyone has put his trust in Him as a Man without a human mind, he is really bereft of mind, and quite unworthy of salvation. For that which He has not assumed He has not healed; but that which is united to His Godhead is also saved. If only half Adam fell, then that which Christ assumes and saves may be half also; but if the whole of his nature fell, it must be united to the whole nature of Him that was begotten, and so be saved as a whole..." (Letters on the Apollinarian Controversy)
Paul in Romans speaks of salvation in terms of the destruction of sinful human nature which could only be accomplished "in the likeness of sinful flesh", the author of Hebrews uses the imagery of a High Priest and mediator who must necessarily share in the same human life in order to be effective, and 2 Peter ties this all together with human participation in the Divine nature, which is certainly tied to an understanding of Jesus as the archetype of that union. Gregory sums all of that up in his view of salvation as divine union itself which requires that the Divine assume the very nature of that which would be saved. This at least I think is the basis for understanding traditional Christian views about the relation between the Divinity and Humanity of Christ.
