Featured Could Christ Have Sinned? III

You are saying that because you have not the Spirit of Christ. JESUS did not lie, neither changed His mind. Also, it is impossible you to understand JESUS having not His mind.

Acts 17:29-31

29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

See, Acts 17:v.30 is referring to the ignorance in "to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device".

So, what kind of ignorance do you intend to attribute to JESUS based on Acts 17: v.30, to justify your false interpretations and false testimonies?

On the other hand, you admit that Satan had dominion over JESUS, JESUS was overcome or subdued by Satan, the father of lie. John 8:v.44

 

It is you who Judge, as you judge JESUS.

See, Acts 17:v.30 is referring to the ignorance in "to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device".

So, what kind of ignorance do you intend to attribute to JESUS based on Acts 17: v.30, to justify your false interpretations and false testimonies?

On the other hand, you admit that Satan had dominion over JESUS, JESUS was overcome or subdued by Satan, the father of lie. John 8:v.44

 

Could Christ Have Sinned?

IMPOSSIBLE

 

Who cares what METZGER says??? The words NOT YET is in the original!

 

• οὐκ] א D K Π 1071 1079 1241 1242 1546 ℓ672 ℓ673 ℓ813 ℓ950 ℓ1223 ita itaur itb itc itd ite itff2 vg syrc syrs copbo arm eth geo slav Diatessaron Porphyryaccording to Jerome Ambrosiaster Epiphanius Chrysostom Augustine Cyril
• οὔπω] p66 p75 B E F G H L N T W X Δ Θ Ψ 070 0105 0141 0180 0250 f1 f13 28 33 157 180 205 597 700 892 1006 1010 1195 1216 1230 1243 1253 1292 1342 1344 1354 1424 1505 1646 2148 Byz Lect itf itq vgmss syrp syrh syrh(gr) syrpal copsa coppbo copach2 goth Basil Nonnus ς WH

The second reading is οὔπω, NOT YET, and dates from around the 2nd century and has by far the strongest textual evidence.

 

I have shown in #27, that the strongest textual evidence has οὔπω, NOT YET!

 

absolute RUBBISH!

 

I have copies of many Greek Papyri manuscripts and the major Unical mss. I also have the early Church fathers in English, Greek and Latin. Bruce Metzger was a second-rate LIBERAL scholar. Here is some of the RUBBISH that Metzger said:

“It is not history, but a legend (the Book of Esther), set back early in the Persian period, intended to explain the origin and significance of Purim. Though embellished with numerous fictional devices, it may well rest on an historical account of some local deliverance of the Jews in Persia, for there is external evidence of a certain Marduka holding an official post at Susa under Xerxes I…Probably as early as the time of David and Solomon, out of a matrix of myth, legend, and history, there had appeared the earliest written form of the story of the saving acts of God from Creation to the conquest of the Promised Land, an account which later in modified form became a part of Scripture. But it was to be a long time before the idea of Scripture arose and the Old Testament took its present form… The book (of Jonah) is a didactic narrative which has taken older material from the realm of popular legend and put it to new, more consequential use…Not all in these books is of the same historical value, and especially in the stories of Elijah and Elisha there are legendary elements.” (Herbert May & Bruce Metzger, The Oxford Annotated Bible, Introduction, pp. xxi, 603, 1120, 1514)

“Although the author of this letter calls himself "Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ" (1:1), and makes reference to his being present at the transfiguration of Jesus Christ (1:18), several features of its style and contents have led nearly all modem scholars to regard it as the work of an unknown author in the early part of the second century who wrote in Peter's name…In the light of such internal and external evidence one must conclude that 2 Peter was drawn up sometime after A.D. 100 by an admirer of Peter who wrote under the name of the great apostle in order to give the letter greater authority” (Bruce Metzger, The New Testament: Its Background Growth and Content 3rd Edition. p.294)

 

Whether He changed his mind or not, He did not lie.
Isn't lying a sin?
There was no sin in Him.
How could He die for us if He sinned?
Imagine all the scenarios God thought about before He created the world.
Jesus lying might have been in one of those scenarios but it was certainly rejected.

Here is a verse where alternate scenarios were considered by our Lord:

And thou, Capernaum,
which art exalted unto heaven,
shalt be brought down to hell:
for if the mighty works,
which had been done in thee,
had been done in Sodom,
it would have remained until this day.
Matthew 11:23

 

For who hath known the mind of the Lord,
that he may instruct him?

But we have the mind of Christ.
1 Corinthians 2:16

 

sure, myself!

 

Yetti for you.

 

You are free to believe in what heresies you want

 

Jesus Christ could NOT have ever sinned