PDA

View Full Version : Controversial topic: could Jesus have sinned?



MarleVVLL
Aug 30th 2011, 09:32 PM
Greetings friends.

Tear this apart if you so desire and let me hear your thoughts.

Red text indicates common responses or rebuttals.

Could Jesus sin? As Christians, we universally acknowledge that Jesus did not sin. However, there is uncertainty and disagreement regarding the question, "could He have/currently still sin?" We will explore several facets to this question in this discussion.
Before we look at Scriptures, we must approach this topic with opens ears and a teachable heart. This topic, like eschatology, usually has great emotional ties and nuances associated with it. Let us be like the Boreans, who searched the Scriptures to determine what was true, and what was not - and then believe what is truth.

MY PREMISE:

God cannot sin; He is perfect (Duet 32:4; 2 Sam 22:31; Ps 18:30). Neither can He be tempted by evil (Jam 1:13). This truth is apart of the idenity of God. Any diviation from this core reality would directly conflict with who God is, and we believe He does not change (Ps 59:19; Heb 13:8), making this conclusion impossible.

Jesus is apart of this Divine Identiy (John 1:1; Col 1:19; Heb 1). If being God is central to Jesus' idenity, then we must conclue that Jesus lived a sinless life (because He is God, not because of a strong will alone), and never had the lure that we feel everyday.

The Apostle's agenda was not to resolve the question of Jesus' seemingly competing natures (human and divine), but rather, to remove Him from the one category of reality and move Him to where He properly belongs - in the idenity of Yahweh. If Jesus is God ("God" is not primarially a personal noun, but rather, a title), it is not because He has the "Divine Essense" linked to His humanity, but rather, He is YHWH incarnated into a human body.

9969

I thought Jesus had a human nature and a Divine nature. What about Col 3:5, Eph 2:3, Gal 4:8, and others that refer to an 'earthly' nature or, the infamous 'human nature'? Additionally, what about 2 Pet 1:4 that speaks of the 'Divine Nature'? It clearly looks as if there are two distinct natures.

Nature does NOT mean, "essense". It means, "as a result of inborn or inherent qualities; innately". Essence refers to the molecular make-up of an object. Published dictionaries do not link essense and nature as synonyms on this level.

Secondly, the Greek word often translated as "nature" is πηυσισ (Strong's 5449) and is pronounced, "foo'-sis". It means, "the sum of innate properties and powers by which one person differs from others, distinctive native peculiarities, natural characteristics: the natural strength, ferocity, and intractability of beasts." In summary, Peter is referring to the unique idenity of YHWH (which was observed above) opposed to man's curropt desire (automatic tendancy) for evil (2 Pet 1:4b).

Jesus is a human, so even if He is God, wouldn't He still have normal human tendancies (towards sin)?

No. Paul informs us that Jesus is not apart of Adam's lineage in Romas 5 and 1st Cor 15. He is not affected by Adam's seed to automatically turn towards evil. This is why the virgin birth is so important to understand. Being born of Mary and NOT of Joseph excluded Jesus from Adam's line, making His line a 'new humanity'. This is why all in Adam will die, and all in Jesus will live. When someone proves their faith in Jesus by repenting of their sins, they are included into Jesus' new line by faith, escorted by the Holy Spirit.

Every Bible I've read says that Jesus was tempted by the Devil in the Wilderness.

Tempt, I believe, is a bad translation. The Greek is better translated as 'tested' or 'be tried' in this context. This word means, "to try, make trial of, test: for the purpose of ascertaining his quantity, or what he thinks, or how he will behave himself". Jesus was tested by the Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 16:1 (same word). Luke 10:25 uses a different Greek word for testing, but it comes directly from the one used to describe Jesus' trail in Matthew 4 and 16.

If we have no problem with the religious leaders or Pilate testing Jesus, why are we so disturbed that the Devil would do it?

Hebrews 4:15 says that Jesus can sympathize with me because He was tempted at every point we were, but didn't choose to sin.

Tempt is the same word used in Matt 4 and Matt 16. I believe this is not referring to a moral struggle, but rather, should remind us of a greater Job. Jesus understands our weakness that is knit to everyday life; He fully comprehends our struggles and our pains. He endured more than any of us in this room, both physically and emotionally.

David Pawson disagrees with you. He used Romans 8:3 as a reference.

His logic is that if 'likeness' is true of Jesus becoming a human in Phil 2:7, then it must apply the same way in Romans 8:3. I agree - Jesus did become a man. However, I believe 'sinful' is what 'likeness' is primarially referring to, not Jesus' humanity.

Thank you and blessings,

Butch5
Aug 30th 2011, 09:59 PM
Greetings friends.

Tear this apart if you so desire and let me hear your thoughts.

Red text indicates common responses or rebuttals.

Could Jesus sin? As Christians, we universally acknowledge that Jesus did not sin. However, there is uncertainty and disagreement regarding the question, "could He have/currently still sin?" We will explore several facets to this question in this discussion.
Before we look at Scriptures, we must approach this topic with opens ears and a teachable heart. This topic, like eschatology, usually has great emotional ties and nuances associated with it. Let us be like the Boreans, who searched the Scriptures to determine what was true, and what was not - and then believe what is truth.

MY PREMISE:

God cannot sin; He is perfect (Duet 32:4; 2 Sam 22:31; Ps 18:30). Neither can He be tempted by evil (Jam 1:13). This truth is apart of the idenity of God. Any diviation from this core reality would directly conflict with who God is, and we believe He does not change (Ps 59:19; Heb 13:8), making this conclusion impossible.

Jesus is apart of this Divine Identiy (John 1:1; Col 1:19; Heb 1). If being God is central to Jesus' idenity, then we must conclue that Jesus lived a sinless life (because He is God, not because of a strong will alone), and never had the lure that we feel everyday.

The Apostle's agenda was not to resolve the question of Jesus' seemingly competing natures (human and divine), but rather, to remove Him from the one category of reality and move Him to where He properly belongs - in the idenity of Yahweh. If Jesus is God ("God" is not primarially a personal noun, but rather, a title), it is not because He has the "Divine Essense" linked to His humanity, but rather, He is YHWH incarnated into a human body.

9969

I thought Jesus had a human nature and a Divine nature. What about Col 3:5, Eph 2:3, Gal 4:8, and others that refer to an 'earthly' nature or, the infamous 'human nature'? Additionally, what about 2 Pet 1:4 that speaks of the 'Divine Nature'? It clearly looks as if there are two distinct natures.

Nature does NOT mean, "essense". It means, "as a result of inborn or inherent qualities; innately". Essence refers to the molecular make-up of an object. Published dictionaries do not link essense and nature as synonyms on this level.

Secondly, the Greek word often translated as "nature" is πηυσισ (Strong's 5449) and is pronounced, "foo'-sis". It means, "the sum of innate properties and powers by which one person differs from others, distinctive native peculiarities, natural characteristics: the natural strength, ferocity, and intractability of beasts." In summary, Peter is referring to the unique idenity of YHWH (which was observed above) opposed to man's curropt desire (automatic tendancy) for evil (2 Pet 1:4b).

Jesus is a human, so even if He is God, wouldn't He still have normal human tendancies (towards sin)?

No. Paul informs us that Jesus is not apart of Adam's lineage in Romas 5 and 1st Cor 15. He is not affected by Adam's seed to automatically turn towards evil. This is why the virgin birth is so important to understand. Being born of Mary and NOT of Joseph excluded Jesus from Adam's line, making His line a 'new humanity'. This is why all in Adam will die, and all in Jesus will live. When someone proves their faith in Jesus by repenting of their sins, they are included into Jesus' new line by faith, escorted by the Holy Spirit.

Every Bible I've read says that Jesus was tempted by the Devil in the Wilderness.

Tempt, I believe, is a bad translation. The Greek is better translated as 'tested' or 'be tried' in this context. This word means, "to try, make trial of, test: for the purpose of ascertaining his quantity, or what he thinks, or how he will behave himself". Jesus was tested by the Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 16:1 (same word). Luke 10:25 uses a different Greek word for testing, but it comes directly from the one used to describe Jesus' trail in Matthew 4 and 16.

If we have no problem with the religious leaders or Pilate testing Jesus, why are we so disturbed that the Devil would do it?

Hebrews 4:15 says that Jesus can sympathize with me because He was tempted at every point we were, but didn't choose to sin.

Tempt is the same word used in Matt 4 and Matt 16. I believe this is not referring to a moral struggle, but rather, should remind us of a greater Job. Jesus understands our weakness that is knit to everyday life; He fully comprehends our struggles and our pains. He endured more than any of us in this room, both physically and emotionally.

David Pawson disagrees with you. He used Romans 8:3 as a reference.

His logic is that if 'likeness' is true of Jesus becoming a human in Phil 2:7, then it must apply the same way in Romans 8:3. I agree - Jesus did become a man. However, I believe 'sinful' is what 'likeness' is primarially referring to, not Jesus' humanity.

Thank you and blessings,

It seems to me that your premise is based on the definiton of "Cannot". The word "Cannot" does not always necessitate a physical inability. For instance, suppose someone calls me on the phone and says, let's go see a movie. I reply I cannot go, I have a meeting. My statement doesn't mean I am physically incapable of gooing to a movie. Likewise the Statement 'God cannot lie' does not necessitate a physical inability to lie. The statement can also be understood that God is so righteous that He could not bring Himslef to lie.

Paul said in Hebrews that Christ was made in all ways like His brethren. If that is the case then He had the physical ability to lie.

Hunter121
Aug 30th 2011, 10:01 PM
To answer your question quickly no, he did not, Jesus gave the example of being completely and utterly perfect.

MarleVVLL
Aug 30th 2011, 11:20 PM
I was hoping to have a more meaningful discussion, but it looks as if my entire post was almost skipped.

Butch - I addressed the premise of Jesus being 'tempted', so my rebuttal to your statement is within my initial post. Using an analogy to prove your point doesn't aid, however, because my entire premise is that your analogy doesn't apply.

Hunter - I wasn't asking for a resolution to my question because I already gave my proposal. I'm curious what other people think and more importantly, WHY.

Blessings,

ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 01:42 AM
If Jesus was unable to commit a sin then his accomplishment of living a sinless life is nothing special. Of course he could have sinned, but despite being human (yes also God but fully human) and despite having maybe even greater temptations thrown at him and literally the weight of the universe on his shoulders, he did not sin a single time not even in thought.

The entire purpose was for God to come as a man and avoid sinning. If he couldn't sin then there is NO ACHEIVEMENT at all. Big deal. Who couldn't have been born and lived sinless if they couldn't sin? It is a MIRACLE, truly magnificent for someone to be fully human and yet not sin a single time. It was the greatest feat ever accomplished. Those that say it was impossible for him to sin while he was a flesh man rob him of his deed.


Greetings friends.

Tear this apart if you so desire and let me hear your thoughts.

Red text indicates common responses or rebuttals.

Could Jesus sin? As Christians, we universally acknowledge that Jesus did not sin. However, there is uncertainty and disagreement regarding the question, "could He have/currently still sin?" We will explore several facets to this question in this discussion.
Before we look at Scriptures, we must approach this topic with opens ears and a teachable heart. This topic, like eschatology, usually has great emotional ties and nuances associated with it. Let us be like the Boreans, who searched the Scriptures to determine what was true, and what was not - and then believe what is truth.

MY PREMISE:

God cannot sin; He is perfect (Duet 32:4; 2 Sam 22:31; Ps 18:30). Neither can He be tempted by evil (Jam 1:13). This truth is apart of the idenity of God. Any diviation from this core reality would directly conflict with who God is, and we believe He does not change (Ps 59:19; Heb 13:8), making this conclusion impossible.

Jesus is apart of this Divine Identiy (John 1:1; Col 1:19; Heb 1). If being God is central to Jesus' idenity, then we must conclue that Jesus lived a sinless life (because He is God, not because of a strong will alone), and never had the lure that we feel everyday.

The Apostle's agenda was not to resolve the question of Jesus' seemingly competing natures (human and divine), but rather, to remove Him from the one category of reality and move Him to where He properly belongs - in the idenity of Yahweh. If Jesus is God ("God" is not primarially a personal noun, but rather, a title), it is not because He has the "Divine Essense" linked to His humanity, but rather, He is YHWH incarnated into a human body.

9969

I thought Jesus had a human nature and a Divine nature. What about Col 3:5, Eph 2:3, Gal 4:8, and others that refer to an 'earthly' nature or, the infamous 'human nature'? Additionally, what about 2 Pet 1:4 that speaks of the 'Divine Nature'? It clearly looks as if there are two distinct natures.

Nature does NOT mean, "essense". It means, "as a result of inborn or inherent qualities; innately". Essence refers to the molecular make-up of an object. Published dictionaries do not link essense and nature as synonyms on this level.

Secondly, the Greek word often translated as "nature" is πηυσισ (Strong's 5449) and is pronounced, "foo'-sis". It means, "the sum of innate properties and powers by which one person differs from others, distinctive native peculiarities, natural characteristics: the natural strength, ferocity, and intractability of beasts." In summary, Peter is referring to the unique idenity of YHWH (which was observed above) opposed to man's curropt desire (automatic tendancy) for evil (2 Pet 1:4b).

Jesus is a human, so even if He is God, wouldn't He still have normal human tendancies (towards sin)?

No. Paul informs us that Jesus is not apart of Adam's lineage in Romas 5 and 1st Cor 15. He is not affected by Adam's seed to automatically turn towards evil. This is why the virgin birth is so important to understand. Being born of Mary and NOT of Joseph excluded Jesus from Adam's line, making His line a 'new humanity'. This is why all in Adam will die, and all in Jesus will live. When someone proves their faith in Jesus by repenting of their sins, they are included into Jesus' new line by faith, escorted by the Holy Spirit.

Every Bible I've read says that Jesus was tempted by the Devil in the Wilderness.

Tempt, I believe, is a bad translation. The Greek is better translated as 'tested' or 'be tried' in this context. This word means, "to try, make trial of, test: for the purpose of ascertaining his quantity, or what he thinks, or how he will behave himself". Jesus was tested by the Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 16:1 (same word). Luke 10:25 uses a different Greek word for testing, but it comes directly from the one used to describe Jesus' trail in Matthew 4 and 16.

If we have no problem with the religious leaders or Pilate testing Jesus, why are we so disturbed that the Devil would do it?

Hebrews 4:15 says that Jesus can sympathize with me because He was tempted at every point we were, but didn't choose to sin.

Tempt is the same word used in Matt 4 and Matt 16. I believe this is not referring to a moral struggle, but rather, should remind us of a greater Job. Jesus understands our weakness that is knit to everyday life; He fully comprehends our struggles and our pains. He endured more than any of us in this room, both physically and emotionally.

David Pawson disagrees with you. He used Romans 8:3 as a reference.

His logic is that if 'likeness' is true of Jesus becoming a human in Phil 2:7, then it must apply the same way in Romans 8:3. I agree - Jesus did become a man. However, I believe 'sinful' is what 'likeness' is primarially referring to, not Jesus' humanity.

Thank you and blessings,

-SEEKING-
Aug 31st 2011, 01:49 AM
could Jesus have sinned?

He could have. But He chose not to.

IMINXTC
Aug 31st 2011, 01:51 AM
If Jesus was unable to commit a sin then his accomplishment of living a sinless life is nothing special..

To the contrary, Jesus laying down His life of sinless perfection in the flesh was essential to yours and my salvation.

For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit. 1Pt 3:18

ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 01:54 AM
To the contrary, Jesus laying down His life of sinless perfection in the flesh was essential to yours and my salvation.


That's not contrary to what I said.

IMINXTC
Aug 31st 2011, 01:55 AM
You said it was nothing special if He was not capable of sinning.

ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 01:57 AM
You said it was nothing special if He was not capable of sinning.

I said living a sinless life simply because its impossible for you to sin is nothing special.

IMINXTC
Aug 31st 2011, 02:02 AM
I said living a sinless life simply because its impossible for you to sin is nothing special.

On this I'll beg to differ.

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched by the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Heb4:15

-SEEKING-
Aug 31st 2011, 02:04 AM
For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched by the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Heb4:15

Excellent. That's the scripture that came to my mind when I saw this thread. Thanks my man.

IMINXTC
Aug 31st 2011, 02:06 AM
Who in the days of His flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to save Him from death, and was heard in that He feared. Heb 5:7

ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 02:14 AM
On this I'll beg to differ.

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched by the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Heb4:15

Apparently you don't understand my point.

IMINXTC
Aug 31st 2011, 02:20 AM
Perhaps I don't.

But Jesus life of sinless perfection in the flesh was special. And not merely because He could not sin, which He could not, but because he was tested and proven even unto blood in His resistance to sin.

The key here is that Jesus did not rise above the weakness of flesh in His suffering. He suffered. But being who He is, namely, God, it was not possible that His eternal nature would be corrupted.

percho
Aug 31st 2011, 02:23 AM
Who in the days of His flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to save Him from death, and was heard in that He feared. Heb 5:7

And I might add. Speaking of Christians compared to Jesus.

Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 02:24 AM
Perhaps I don't.

But Jesus life of sinless perfection in the flesh was special. And not merely because He could not sin, which He could not, but because he was tested and proven even unto blood in His resistance to sin.

Yeah but you say two things:

1: he wasn't even able to sin

then you say

2: he was tested

but what kind of test is it when you cannot fail the test? It's cheating. What "resistance" to sin is even possible when its already impossible to commit sin?

No, Jesus could have sinned and the fact that he didn't is an amazing feat.

IMINXTC
Aug 31st 2011, 02:27 AM
A late edit:

The key here is that Jesus did not rise above the weakness of flesh in His suffering. He suffered. But being who He is, namely, God, it was not possible that His eternal nature would be corrupted.

ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 02:38 AM
But being who He is, namely, God, it was not possible that His eternal nature would be corrupted.

Well, I disagree

mikebr
Aug 31st 2011, 11:21 AM
I believe the core of sin is unbelief. I don't think if Jesus smoked a pipe it would have been sin. I'm pretty sure He drank wine, both of which some would call sin. Since sin is basically unbelief then there is no way that Jesus could have sinned. He bore our unbelief on the Cross.

Quickened
Aug 31st 2011, 02:26 PM
I said living a sinless life simply because its impossible for you to sin is nothing special.

Perhaps I too am missing the point.

The first thing that comes to my mind is:

Regardless of the disagreement the sacrifice is undoubtedly special as it provides atonement for many. It doesn't cease being special one way or the other. A Blood sacrifice for sinners that are undeserving cannot cease from being special.

VerticalReality
Aug 31st 2011, 02:36 PM
Yeah but you say two things:

1: he wasn't even able to sin

then you say

2: he was tested

but what kind of test is it when you cannot fail the test? It's cheating. What "resistance" to sin is even possible when its already impossible to commit sin?

No, Jesus could have sinned and the fact that he didn't is an amazing feat.

Don't worry, I see what you're saying. I agree with you. Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh, and He was tempted in all manner just as we are. If He were incapable of sinning then temptation wouldn't be possible. If He were incapable of sinning then no test actually took place. He operated completely as a man, and the reason He kept Himself from sin was not because He was operating as God but because He humbled Himself completely to the will of His Father.

John 8:32
Aug 31st 2011, 04:34 PM
I believe the core of sin is unbelief. I don't think if Jesus smoked a pipe it would have been sin. I'm pretty sure He drank wine, both of which some would call sin. Since sin is basically unbelief then there is no way that Jesus could have sinned. He bore our unbelief on the Cross.

Bible definition:

1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Whether you or I or any other mortal think something is sin or it is not sin is irrelevant. What God says about sin is truth.

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

MarleVVLL
Aug 31st 2011, 05:24 PM
Hello friends.

No one has yet to refer to my initial post in detail. I address most of the rebuttals that have be given thus far.

I can reply to each person, but I'd simply be quoting myself from my originality post.

In simple terms: tempt can be readily translated as 'testing', just as Job was tested through suffering. Jesus was tested too - but He wasn't tempted by sin because God cannot be tempted by sin (James 1:13).

Blessings,

VerticalReality
Aug 31st 2011, 06:24 PM
So when Satan said, "Turn this stone to bread," was Jesus not truly hungry?

Noonzie
Aug 31st 2011, 06:32 PM
Hello friends.

No one has yet to refer to my initial post in detail. I address most of the rebuttals that have be given thus far.

I can reply to each person, but I'd simply be quoting myself from my originality post.

In simple terms: tempt can be readily translated as 'testing', just as Job was tested through suffering. Jesus was tested too - but He wasn't tempted by sin because God cannot be tempted by sin (James 1:13).

Blessings,

I think nimblewillsgrace makes a good point below.

I believe the core of sin is unbelief. I don't think if Jesus smoked a pipe it would have been sin. I'm pretty sure He drank wine, both of which some would call sin. Since sin is basically unbelief then there is no way that Jesus could have sinned. He bore our unbelief on the Cross.

Everything that does not come from faith is sin. Jesus is the creator and sustainer of all things, and in him all things hold together. He was holding everything together even as he suffered on the cross. His human form didn't lack diety and he was fully aware of Himself and who He was from eternity past. How could anything He did not be by faith? It was only by Christ's power that satan was even able to test Him.

Romans 14:23 - "But whoever has doubts is condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin."

Sin is the failure to trust God. Sin can't just be defined as just outward acts, it is much more than that, which really brings us to the point of realizing how sinful we really are and how justification through the grace given by Christ is necessary. As you grow in Christ, repentance will grow because this knowledge of your own sinful nature is revealed to you. The faith given you gives you hope and assurance in your salvation.

VerticalReality
Aug 31st 2011, 06:37 PM
I think nimblewillsgrace makes a good point below.


Everything that does not come from faith is sin. Jesus is the creator and sustainer of all things, and in him all things hold together. He was holding everything together even as he suffered on the cross. His human form didn't lack diety and he was fully aware of Himself and who He was from eternity past. How could anything He did not be by faith? It was only by Christ's power that satan was even able to test Him.

Romans 14:23 - "But whoever has doubts is condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin."

Sin is the failure to trust God. Sin can't just be defined as just outward acts, it is much more than that, which really brings us to the point of realizing how sinful we really are and how justification through the grace given by Christ is necessary. As you grow in Christ, repentance will grow because this knowledge of your own sinful nature is revealed to you. The faith given you gives you hope and assurance in your salvation.

I do not agree that sin is always unbelief. It could just be flatout rebelliousness and disobedience.

Noonzie
Aug 31st 2011, 06:38 PM
I do not agree that sin is always unbelief. It could just be flatout rebelliousness and disobedience.

But why are you rebellious and disobedient?

percho
Aug 31st 2011, 06:41 PM
Hello friends.

No one has yet to refer to my initial post in detail. I address most of the rebuttals that have be given thus far.

I can reply to each person, but I'd simply be quoting myself from my originality post.

In simple terms: tempt can be readily translated as 'testing', just as Job was tested through suffering. Jesus was tested too - but He wasn't tempted by sin because God cannot be tempted by sin (James 1:13).

Blessings,

And by the same token he wasn't obedient unto death even death on the cross for it would be impossible for God to be disobedient.

VerticalReality
Aug 31st 2011, 06:42 PM
But why are you rebellious and disobedient?

I know when my son is rebellious or disobedient it is because he just chooses to be. It's not that he doesn't believe that his dad exists. It's not that he believes that he won't get in trouble. It's not that he doesn't know that what he is doing is wrong. Yet, still there is the occasion when he chooses to be rebellious and disobedient anyway.

Noonzie
Aug 31st 2011, 06:49 PM
I know when my son is rebellious or disobedient it is because he just chooses to be. It's not that he doesn't believe that his dad exists. It's not that he believes that he won't get in trouble. It's not that he doesn't know that what he is doing is wrong. Yet, still there is the occasion when he chooses to be rebellious and disobedient anyway.

It is because he doesn't have faith in what you are asking him to do will be for his own good. Just as when we are disobedient to God, we believe something else is better at the time. If we have faith, then we know that God does all things for the good of those who love him.

The root is faith.

John146
Aug 31st 2011, 07:54 PM
Every Bible I've read says that Jesus was tempted by the Devil in the Wilderness.

Tempt, I believe, is a bad translation. The Greek is better translated as 'tested' or 'be tried' in this context. This word means, "to try, make trial of, test: for the purpose of ascertaining his quantity, or what he thinks, or how he will behave himself". Jesus was tested by the Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 16:1 (same word). Luke 10:25 uses a different Greek word for testing, but it comes directly from the one used to describe Jesus' trail in Matthew 4 and 16.The same word used to describe the tempting or testing of Jesus is used here:

1 Cor 10:13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

And here:

James 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

Regardless of whether you use the word tempt or test what Satan did was test to see if Jesus would do things that He shouldn't do. Isn't that what tempting is, to bring something to one's attention that they shouldn't do and try to get them to do it? How is what Satan did to Jesus in the wilderness not a case of him having tempted Jesus to do things that He shouldn't do?


Hebrews 4:15 says that Jesus can sympathize with me because He was tempted at every point we were, but didn't choose to sin.

Tempt is the same word used in Matt 4 and Matt 16. I believe this is not referring to a moral struggle, but rather, should remind us of a greater Job. Jesus understands our weakness that is knit to everyday life; He fully comprehends our struggles and our pains. He endured more than any of us in this room, both physically and emotionally.Again, it's the same word as is used in verses like 1 Cor 10:13 and James 1:13-14. Do you think verses like 1 Cor 10:13 or James 1:13-14 aren't speaking of people being tempted to do things they shouldn't do? How could it be said that Jesus was tested or tempted by Satan if it wasn't even possible for Him to give in to it? If that wasn't possible why didn't He just laugh in Satan's face and say "Don't you know that it's not even possible for me to give in to your testing/tempting? You're wasting your time."?

VerticalReality
Aug 31st 2011, 08:07 PM
It is because he doesn't have faith in what you are asking him to do will be for his own good. Just as when we are disobedient to God, we believe something else is better at the time. If we have faith, then we know that God does all things for the good of those who love him.

The root is faith.

No, I think I know my son pretty well. Your theological insistance otherwise will not change that. A person's academic doctrine does not trump real life evidence.

Additionally, Paul's testimony in Romans 7 shows full well that a person can know what is good for them yet still be disobedient, and there was no mistaking in that passage of scripture that Paul knew God's way was better. Yet, he still chose otherwise.

mikebr
Aug 31st 2011, 08:35 PM
Has it occurred to any of you that Jesus eventually did or will do what Satan tempted/tested/tried Him to do.

John146
Aug 31st 2011, 09:20 PM
Has it occurred to any of you that Jesus eventually did or will do what Satan tempted/tested/tried Him to do.Matt 4:5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, 6And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. 7Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. 8Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; 9And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

Are you trying to say Jesus eventually did or will throw Himself off the temple or that He eventually did or will fall down and worship Satan? I can't imagine that's what you're saying, so please explain what you mean.

mikebr
Aug 31st 2011, 10:13 PM
Matt 4:5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, 6And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. 7Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. 8Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; 9And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

Are you trying to say Jesus eventually did or will throw Himself off the temple or that He eventually did or will fall down and worship Satan? I can't imagine that's what you're saying, so please explain what you mean.

He was being tempted with "all these things will I give thee." They are His. Always have been His and always will be His. Satan was tempting Him with something that is His. That's what I'm trying to say.

He can also turn rocks into food if He wants to. ;)

He also cast Himself down in Hades for three days. That's what I'm trying to say.

ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 10:27 PM
Since sin is basically unbelief then there is no way that Jesus could have sinned.

This is what the bible says is sin:

1Jn_3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

It also says where there is no law, there is no sin.

Rom_5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

mikebr
Aug 31st 2011, 10:39 PM
This is what the bible says is sin:

1Jn_3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

It also says where there is no law, there is no sin.

Rom_5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Jesus certainly transgressed the Law of Moses unless I have a misunderstanding of what "transgress" actually means. Or maybe you weren't talking about the Law of Moses?

ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 11:44 PM
Jesus certainly transgressed the Law of Moses unless I have a misunderstanding of what "transgress" actually means. Or maybe you weren't talking about the Law of Moses?

What? How did Christ transgress the law of Moses?

mikebr
Aug 31st 2011, 11:50 PM
What? How did Christ transgress the law of Moses?

He touched unclean people, picked wheat on the Sabbath, Claimed to be God, etc. Weren't those things against Jewish Law?

ewq1938
Aug 31st 2011, 11:53 PM
He touched unclean people, picked wheat on the Sabbath, Claimed to be God, etc. Weren't those things against Jewish Law?

Jewish law maybe but not God's law. There was no sin in what He did. Man added rules and other garbage onto the law but it didn't come from God. BTW, the disciples picked the wheat.

MarleVVLL
Aug 31st 2011, 11:58 PM
I believe the core of sin is unbelief. I don't think if Jesus smoked a pipe it would have been sin. I'm pretty sure He drank wine, both of which some would call sin. Since sin is basically unbelief then there is no way that Jesus could have sinned. He bare our unbelief on the Cross.

We're not talking about the source of sin, however. We're talking about sin itself. The reason behind the sin is irrelevant in this discussion. However, to make one remark, you're basing sin on cultural morality and not on God. He is our standard, not whether or not we determine smoking something in a pipe is sinful. Secondly, the act of drinking wine is never referred to sin in Scripture. Paul commanded Timothy to drink wine for his stomach ailments. Thirdly, Jesus didn't bore our unbelief; He bore our SIN.


The same word used to describe the tempting or testing of Jesus is used here: ...

Yes - that word can be translated as tempted OR as testing. I'm debating that where it is translated as 'tempted' in reference to Jesus should be 'tested', because God cannot be tempted by evil (James 1:13) and based on my other points.

Thanks for the lively discussion!

Blessings,

mikebr
Sep 1st 2011, 12:08 AM
Jewish law maybe but not God's law. There was no sin in what He did. Man added rules and other garbage onto the law but it didn't come from God. BTW, the disciples picked the wheat.


were those things I mentioned against the law of Moses?

"Jesus answered them, 'My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.' Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God" (John 5:17–18).

Noonzie
Sep 1st 2011, 12:27 AM
We're not talking about the source of sin, however. We're talking about sin itself. The reason behind the sin is irrelevant in this discussion. However, to make one remark, you're basing sin on cultural morality and not on God. He is our standard, not whether or not we determine smoking something in a pipe is sinful. Secondly, the act of drinking wine is never referred to sin in Scripture. Paul commanded Timothy to drink wine for his stomach ailments. Thirdly, Jesus didn't bore our unbelief; He bore our SIN.



Yes - that word can be translated as tempted OR as testing. I'm debating that where it is translated as 'tempted' in reference to Jesus should be 'tested', because God cannot be tempted by evil (James 1:13) and based on my other points.

Thanks for the lively discussion!

Blessings,

Friend, probably saying the that it is the source of sin is an incorrect way to put it. unbelief is a sin and is the root of what becomes outwardly visable. Ones obedience to the law outwardly could be utterly sinful.
it is the heart and the motive that is first.
Faith alone makes us just and brings the Spirit and the desire to do good outward works. It is only unbelief which sins and magnifies ourself and brings desire to do evil outwordly works.

It was Adam and Eve's unbelief that lead them to eat of the tree.

John 16:8-9
"When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: about sin, because people do not believe in me"

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 12:33 AM
were those things I mentioned against the law of Moses?

No.



"Jesus answered them, 'My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.' Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God" (John 5:17–18).

It was man's law added to God's that said you couldn't do any kind of work at all. Its a day of rest but there are things God allowed, such as saving an animal, or a friend. You just didn't "go to work" like any other day.

mikebr
Sep 1st 2011, 01:52 AM
No.




It was man's law added to God's that said you couldn't do any kind of work at all. Its a day of rest but there are things God allowed, such as saving an animal, or a friend. You just didn't "go to work" like any other day.

So how do you know which is which? Of the 600+ laws which were Jewish laws and which were the Laws of Moses?

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 02:34 AM
So how do you know which is which? Of the 600+ laws which were Jewish laws and which were the Laws of Moses?

The laws in the OT are the laws. There were even more laws that were added long after the Ot laws and it were those Jesus was accused of breaking but they werent real laws.

Hawkins
Sep 1st 2011, 02:41 AM
Jesus Christ can't sin because,

1) He knows the will of God the Father 100%
2) He follows God's will 100%

That's why it is impossible for Him to have sinned. As God the Son He knows well God's will. Even as a human, He followed God's will 100% (prove it otherwise if you don't think so). As a result, He can't sin at all!

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 02:46 AM
Even as a human, He followed God's will 100% (prove it otherwise if you don't think so).

Did Christ not learn to obey his Father by suffering very difficult things?

IMINXTC
Sep 1st 2011, 02:56 AM
Learning obedience (Heb 5:8) is not the same thing as having the ability to sin.

He now demonstrates obedience in His human state, through suffering.

Where men fail, Christ does not. He has no sin nature.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 02:57 AM
Learning obedience (Heb) 5:8 is not the same thing as having the ability to sin.



Of course not but I was answering a different question.

IMINXTC
Sep 1st 2011, 02:58 AM
Oh, that's okay. I'm free to post. You're free to disregard.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 03:03 AM
The OT sacrifice of a flawless lamb was the forerunner of Christ being sinless and being killed as a sacrifice for our sins. A lamb had to meet strict criteria in order to be considered "perfect" enough. Could the lamb become flawed somehow? Of course. The lamb could get sick, break a leg, etc etc. This to me proves that Jesus also could have sinned but did not as opposed to never even being able to sin which I maintain is no difficult job. Again, if you cannot possibly sin, then living a sin free life is no accomplishment, no difficultly, no challenge, no test, no temptations are temptations, no overcoming anything and so on.

Hawkins
Sep 1st 2011, 03:08 AM
Did Christ not learn to obey his Father by suffering very difficult things?

Can you quote a verse to show that Jesus has difficulties following God's will?

Christ's suffering is invited by Himself. He made a willful suffering to atone for our sins. And this has nothing to do with "difficulties" following God's will.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 03:09 AM
Can you quote a verse to show that Jesus has difficulties following God's will?

Heb 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
Heb 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

In this case, Jesus prayed for something not to happen involving him but his Father denied his request and Christ suffered for this to teach him obedience.

Hawkins
Sep 1st 2011, 03:15 AM
Heb 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
Heb 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

In this case, Jesus prayed for something not to happen involving him but his Father denied his request and Christ suffered for this to teach him obedience.

Paul seems to say that Jesus as a human showed His weakness of being afraid of "something" (not necessarily death itself), it by no means says that He has any difficulties in obeying God. We learn things all the times, it by no means says that we have difficulties in handling things.

Moreover, this is not an example of His failure in obeying God. He obeyed anyway. So His obediance is still 100%.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 03:21 AM
it by no means says that He has any difficulties in obeying God.

That's exactly what it says, in this one specific thing. Christ always obeyed eventually but in this one case, he didn't want to go through with the original plan and asked for it to change....the answer was a resounding, very strict NO.

Christ had to learn to obey his Father, and this wasn't written for when he was a child but a 33 year old man.

Hawkins
Sep 1st 2011, 03:24 AM
No, He learns obediance even in the point of His weakness, such that He's perfect. It is not saying that He has any difficulties in obeying. If on the other hand, He has difficutlites in obeying God, He's far from being perfect!!!

"...he learned obedience through what he suffered. 9And being made perfect..."

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 03:25 AM
No, He learns obediance even in the point of His weakness, such that He's perfect. It is not saying that He has any difficulties in obeying.

I disagree with your interpretation.


If on the other hand, He has difficutlites in obeying God, He's far from being perfect!!!

He was sinless. But he did learn obedience and suffered for it.

Hawkins
Sep 1st 2011, 03:28 AM
He was sinless because He did 100% follow God's will, even in the point of His weakness!! And that's why He's perfect!

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 03:40 AM
He was sinless because He did 100% follow God's will, even in the point of His weakness!! And that's why He's perfect!

Sure but you seem not to accept that Christ didn't want to obey on this one thing. He certainly ended up obeying, but he wanted God to change his mind and God said NO.

percho
Sep 1st 2011, 04:17 AM
For consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.
Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.

AS Jesus did.

mikebr
Sep 1st 2011, 12:44 PM
The laws in the OT are the laws. There were even more laws that were added long after the Ot laws and it were those Jesus was accused of breaking but they werent real laws.

so if I break laws like smoking marijuana or speeding am I sinning? There certainly not ot laws.

I agree that Jesus didn't sin, I do think he broke the law.

John 8:32
Sep 1st 2011, 02:04 PM
so if I break laws like smoking marijuana or speeding am I sinning? There certainly not ot laws.

I agree that Jesus didn't sin, I do think he broke the law.

He taught a lot differently...

Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

Mat 22:17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
Mat 22:18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
Mat 22:19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
Mat 22:20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
Mat 22:21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Rom 13:2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
Rom 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
Rom 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Rom 13:5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
Rom 13:6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
Rom 13:7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Tit 3:1 Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,

Heb 13:17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

Do you suppose that Christ violated His own teachings?

MarleVVLL
Sep 1st 2011, 06:51 PM
I'm curious - who here read my first post IN FULL? Most of the mini-conversations happening in this conversation have already been covered there.

Great conversation guys!

Blessings,

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 09:37 PM
I agree that Jesus didn't sin, I do think he broke the law.

Breaking God's law is sinning, but Jesus didnt break any of those laws, only man made laws/rules like a special type of hand washing, or associating with lower class people, doing good things on the Sabbath.

mikebr
Sep 1st 2011, 10:06 PM
Breaking God's law is sinning, but Jesus didnt break any of those laws, only man made laws/rules like a special type of hand washing, or associating with lower class people, doing good things on the Sabbath.

Do you think drinking wine is a sin? I bet most on this board do. How about smoking?

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 10:13 PM
Do you think drinking wine is a sin? I bet most on this board do.


I bet most here wouldn't. Whenever I see a topic like that the majority tend to know wine was ok to drink and that Christ and most everyone did drink wine, real wine.



How about smoking?

People smoked in biblical times but the bible is silent on it. It can give you cancer, but so can being in the sun too much. I don't see it as a sin because I see no law violated.

mikebr
Sep 1st 2011, 10:22 PM
I bet most here wouldn't. Whenever I see a topic like that the majority tend to know wine was ok to drink and that Christ and most everyone did drink wine, real wine.




People smoked in biblical times but the bible is silent on it. It can give you cancer, but so can being in the sun too much. I don't see it as a sin because I see no law violated.

Yeah, kinda silly for me to say "most" of anything. Sorry, we obviously grew up being taught different things.:hug:

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 10:25 PM
Yeah, kinda silly for me to say "most" of anything. Sorry, we obviously grew up being taught different things.:hug:

I think you should start a new thread and ask everyone to vote in a poll about whether wine is a sin. I would guess that most would say its not a sin but can be if you abuse it.

mikebr
Sep 1st 2011, 10:36 PM
I think I will. Thanks.

John146
Sep 1st 2011, 11:14 PM
Yes - that word can be translated as tempted OR as testing. I'm debating that where it is translated as 'tempted' in reference to Jesus should be 'tested', because God cannot be tempted by evil (James 1:13) and based on my other points.He was tempted in His humanity, not His deity. Do you not see any difference between His humanity and His deity? Also, Hebrews 4:15 says He was tempted in every way we are but did not sin so the context of that verse is speaking of being tempted to do things that shouldn't be done. When Jesus was being tempted/tested by Satan in what sense was He being tested? Wasn't Satan tempting/testing Him to try to get Him to do things that He shouldn't do?

gringo300
Sep 1st 2011, 11:20 PM
I read over this thread, and have concluded that it opens so many logical cans of worms that I don't know how to respond right now.

-

This may be semi-related:

I've heard various people basically say- or at least that's how I interpreted it- that every time a person sins, that they were deceived somehow.

That doesn't line up with a lot of what I observe every day of my life.

I see people go so far out of their way to sin, it blows my mind, even now.

ewq1938
Sep 1st 2011, 11:23 PM
He was tempted in His humanity, not His deity.

Thats not what the scriptures show:

Luk 4:2 Being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered.
Luk 4:3 And the devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread.