Did Jesus Have a Sinful Nature While on Earth?

[Marcia]

The book gave an example reflecting the Western churches position which is too long for me to give here. Basically it said that Jesus always wanted to do the right thing, but His temptation was to do good things in the wrong manner.

A man tempted to steal to feed his hungry children would be doing a good thing in the wrong way.

The example the book gave of the Eastern position would be a man tempted to steal to feed himself, i.e. stealing to satisfy himself.

Any comments on these examples?

I don't think this premise about being tempted to good things the wrong way is right. Jesus was tempted by Satan to worship Satan and to test God. Neither of those are good in any way. Jesus did not do them, of course, but these temptations (which are called temptations and so we must take them that way) are recorded in the Bible.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the 'seed of Abraham. '

Scripture clearly refutes the notion that Christ was not born with the same nature man is born with. Some need to decide whether of not He was indeed a man of the seed of Abraham, or if they want to re-write Scripture to provide cover for a false Augustinian notion of original sin. As for me, I will stick with the Word of God as it is written.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Scripture is clear about the legion of temptations that Christ faced, the specifics of which few are recorded.

Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in ALL POINTS tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

 

[drfuss]

Different Temptations?

Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

Since we have a sinful nature, how could Jesus be tempted in all points as we are, if He did not have a sinful nature? If He did not have a sinful nature, wouldn't His temptations be different than ours? If so, in what way were the different?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Drfuss: Since we have a sinful nature, how could Jesus be tempted in all points as we are, if He did not have a sinful nature? If He did not have a sinful nature, wouldn't His temptations be different than ours? If so, in what way were the different?

HP: You are starting off from an unscriptural presupposition, i.e., sinful nature/original sin. Therein lies the problem, not with understanding how Christ was tempted.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Would to God that we could just accept the fact that all have sinned, and quit trying to manufacture notions that go beyond Scripture and reason in trying to answer the question 'why do men sin.' The 'why' is not important. What is important is that all have sinned and need a Savior.

When we try and answer the 'why' we end up reducing morality to something necessitated, (an oxymoron) clearly destroying all morality and accountability in the wake of our answers.

 

[DHK]

Would to God that we could just accept the fact that all have sinned, and quit trying to manufacture notions that go beyond Scripture and reason in trying to answer the question 'why do men sin.' The 'why' is not important. What is important is that all have sinned and need a Savior.

When we try and answer the 'why' we end up reducing morality to something necessitated, (an oxymoron) clearly destroying all morality and accountability in the wake of our answers.

The why is very important. CoRobinson put it very well as to why it is crucial to our faith.

I think that the baby Jesus was attached to Mary by umbilical cord. I also think this doesn't matter as far as having a sin nature, because Scripture teaches that the sin nature comes through the man, hence the need for the virgin birth so that Jesus doesn't inherit the sin nature.

I would say that Jesus doesn't have a sin nature because he didn't inherit a sin nature from a man.

 

[Marcia]

Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

Since we have a sinful nature, how could Jesus be tempted in all points as we are, if He did not have a sinful nature? If He did not have a sinful nature, wouldn't His temptations be different than ours? If so, in what way were the different?

Adam and Eve did not have a sin nature but were tempted (and gave in).

I think it's a mystery of how Jesus could be tempted as we are yet not have a sinful nature. We just know it's true. He was God and added humanity to his nature, becoming the God-man. This makes him unique. He was still tempted and still suffered as man; we know that.

Christ is called the second Adam, so maybe in the way that Adam did not have a sin nature but was tempted, so was Jesus. Adam gave in; Jesus did not. Adam was the head of fallen men; Jesus is the redeemer of fallen men. We are born in Adam but saved in Christ.

 

[drfuss]

Marcia weites:
"I think it's a mystery of how Jesus could be tempted as we are yet not have a sinful nature. We just know it's true. He was God and added humanity to his nature, becoming the God-man. This makes him unique. He was still tempted and still suffered as man; we know that."

Perhaps the above is the answer - a mystery. It seems to me that no one can adquately answer the question of how Jesus temptations were both the same as our temptations and yet different from our temptations.

Another tension in scripture?

 

[Marcia]

Marcia weites:
"I think it's a mystery of how Jesus could be tempted as we are yet not have a sinful nature. We just know it's true. He was God and added humanity to his nature, becoming the God-man. This makes him unique. He was still tempted and still suffered as man; we know that."

Perhaps the above is the answer - a mystery. It seems to me that no one can adquately answer the question of how Jesus temptations were both the same as our temptations and yet different from our temptations.

Another tension in scripture?

I think the reason it's hard to grasp is because it has to do with God's (Jesus') nature. It's hard to totally grasp the incarnation as well, and even the atonement. We can only go so far understanding things to do with God's nature. I think God has revealed what we need to know about Him and we can understand what we need to know and what's important to know. Beyond that, we would have to be God to totally comprehend Him and how He does things.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

The answer to the OP is absolutely not. Why, because He was not born with the same nature man is born with? No. Because He did not sin.

 

[Victorious]

But how do you get around the verse in James that God cannot be tempted?

Jesus was God incarnate! Son of God that is.

Tempted as an action but not tempted in the sense that He gave it any other thought that was not in keeping with His nature.

Maybe this?

Although Jesus is God, He humbled Himself and emptied Himself of His divinity and relied totally on the Father. He put on the likeness of man, so as man, He could be tempted. Why was it necessary for Him to be tempted?

"For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." (Hebrews 4:15 NASB)​

He chose to humble Himself:

"Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men." (Philippians 2:5-7 NASB)​

Emptied Himself of what?

You can see the separation between Jesus' divinity and His humanity in these scriptures:

"But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."(Mark 13:32 NASB)

"I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me." (John 5:30 NASB)


He was fully man and fully God, and in complete subjection to God the Father on earth.


Interesting to contemplate...:flower:

 

[Robert Snow]

I think that the baby Jesus was attached to Mary by umbilical cord. I also think this doesn't matter as far as having a sin nature, because Scripture teaches that the sin nature comes through the man, hence the need for the virgin birth so that Jesus doesn't inherit the sin nature.

I would say that Jesus doesn't have a sin nature because he didn't inherit a sin nature from a man.

Excellent! I agree completely.

Also, it was mention elsewhere in this thread about Jesus being tempted of the Devil in the wilderness. I believe this temptation was to show he was the Son of God, not to see if He would sin. The Bible says that God cannot sin, therefore Jesus could not sin.

 

[David Michael Harris]

That is interesting what ccrobinson said. We believe in the conception by the Holy Spirit. Did Mary provide the egg? Is this not why Roman Catholics venerate Mary so highly? They even say she was sinless, which is error according to Paul.

 

[ccrobinson]

Did Mary provide the egg? Is this not why Roman Catholics venerate Mary so highly? They even say she was sinless, which is error according to Paul.

Yes, she did provide the egg. But, as I said before, the sin nature comes from the man, thus, the need for conception by the Holy Spirit and the virgin birth.

I think Mary was honored by God, so it makes sense that she should be honored by us. It was the angel who said, "Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women." The sticking point is how much should she be honored and that sounds like a topic for another thread. The only way that Mary could be sinless is if she, too, was born of a virgin. It's my understanding that Scripture teaches that Mary had a human father, thus she had a sin nature and wasn't sinless.

 

[David Michael Harris]

I am liking this. Thank you. Anyone else like to comment on this.

 

[drfuss]

As I said in the OP, this issue is new to me. So how about helping me walk through this.

We know Jesus died for our sins. Did Jesus also die to save us from our sinful nature? Not the effects of our sinful nature, but from the sinful nature itself?

IF so, do you have any scriptures that specifically say He died to save us from our sinful nature? Not scriptures that are interpreted to mean that, but scriptures that specifically say that?

 

[Agnus_Dei]

As I said in the OP, this issue is new to me. So how about helping me walk through this.

We know Jesus died for our sins. Did Jesus also die to save us from our sinful nature? Not the effects of our sinful nature, but from the sinful nature itself?

drfuss...to answer your questions one has to discuss and have an understanding of the following:

What was state of man and his purpose before the Fall...
What was the state of man after the Fall...
Why did Christ come and what did He accomplish...
Christ came as Saviour, in order to redeem man. But to redeem man from what?

here's a link to an article I'd like for you to read, which may better explain who Christ is from an Orthodox Christian perspective:

Who is Jesus Christ

In XC
-

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Ccrobinson: Yes, she did provide the egg. But, as I said before, the sin nature comes from the man, thus, the need for conception by the Holy Spirit and the virgin birth.

HP: Can you support your ideas from Scripture? Where does Scripture even mention a sin nature 'from birth?' Who said the sin nature comes from 'man' in any sense that is separating 'man' as opposed to a woman? Who said the virgin birth was necessary to keep Christ from some inherited contagion? Where do Scriptures ever represent sin as some contagion anyway? If a sin nature causes me to sin and that by necessity, tell us how Christ could take upon Himself that very nature as Scripture states He did without inheriting the same sin we do? Abraham was a man was he not?
Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

What right to the throne of David as the Messiah did Christ have if in fact He was not of the physical lineage of David, yet another 'man?'

If my nature necessitates me to sin, what purpose is temptation anyway? If all I can do is sin due to my nature, temptation is necessitated by my nature. If Christ is tempted in all points as we are, and we are tempted by our natures driven by necessity, the same would have to apply to Christ as well if tempted as we are, is that not correct?

Has anyone read James lately?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Drfuss: We know Jesus died for our sins. Did Jesus also die to save us from our sinful nature? Not the effects of our sinful nature, but from the sinful nature itself?

HP: If we sin due to the necessitated impulses of our nature, our nature would have to be changed to obey. If it is changed to obey, then that would be just as necessitated as it was to sin, just in an opposite manner, making sin an absolute impossibility once the nature was changed. What ever happened to the will choosing? Whatever happened to the concept of just punishment or praise for our actions? Whatever happened to the right concept of love, sin, or morality in general? Is man just some piece of putty reacting out of necessity to either some irresistible force of evil or good, depending on which one is necessitating his action at the moment?

I can assure you that until you escape the pollution of Augustinian original sin, the false notion that sin lies in the flesh as opposed to the will, that you will live and die chasing rabbit trails leading to anywhere and everywhere but truth.