Could Jesus have sinned?

Honestly Bob, I wasn't being hostile at all. Sorry you took it that way.

I was simply responding to what you asked.

 

Ok

 

It's the silent "H" in HTULIP, a common trait I see here on the BB by the reformers. </font>[/QUOTE]You have a knack for seeing things that aren't there. There was absolutely no hostile intent in my response to Bob. In fact, I can assure you that I enjoy interacting with both of you guys the vast, vast majority of the time. I think you're wrong on some things... but I carry no anomosity for either of you.

 

Well the feeling is mutual for I think you are wrong on some things.

 

If the Gospels were sanitized, then why believe anything in it? We would not know what is true or what is not true. The Bible is clear that Jesus was without sin. What evidence do we need to believe that?

</font>[/QUOTE]Thank you for these quotations, which add to the one from Hebrews that I cited. But the problem with the Gospels is that they are selective. John even tells us that his report is purposely selective. So the evangelists might have chosen not to report anything that verged on the sinful. In the end, we as Christians make a faith commitment to the sinlessness of Jesus. It is not something that can be proved. The statements from the epistles you quoted as well as the one from Hebrews I cited are affirmations that cannot fully assure us that Jesus did not sin. All we have for the evidence of that is a set of reports that mention no sin. &lt;snipped for space&gt; </font>[/QUOTE]Joseph, either what the Bible states is true and inspired by God or is it not. If these verses tell us Jesus did not sin, then he did not sin. One would only doubt this if they thought these statements were lies or erroneous, in which case we can't trust anything in the Bible.

I'm somewhat surprised you seem to think that these statements might not be true.

 

Mima, Jesus had a human nature and his body was not the only human part of him. Jesus was not just God in a body - he was 100% man and 100% God.
He had to be made like us -- man -- in order to bear our sins.

 

no

 

You've taken what I wrote too far. I did not say that I think these statements might not be true. In fact, my Christology is quite orthodox. What I am attempting to do is to get us to see that there is no way to "prove" Jesus' sinlessness from the evidence available. Just because New Testament writers say He was does not make the statement irrefutable, because anyone can affirm anything without adducing the evidence for it. It's just an affirmation.

As for the Gospels -- yes, I was being provocative by suggesting the notion that they could have been "sanitized", that is, that the evangelists chose not to report anything that might have looked like sin. Again my intent is that we see that from a historiographical viewpoint, one cannot prove a negative. One cannot prove Jesus' sinlessness by citing the record of His life, because we do not know what was omitted from that record.

Use of the affirmations of Jesus' sinlessness works only when you believe something like what you have said .. that if it is in the Bible it is true. I am not arguing against that. I am simply pointing out that it is a faith statement, not a conclusion from evidence. It is more "I believe" than "I think" or "I know".

Probably should say again that I do believe in the One who was tempted in all points as we are, yet without sin.

 

It's the silent "H" in HTULIP, a common trait I see here on the BB by the reformers. </font>[/QUOTE]You have a knack for seeing things that aren't there. There was absolutely no hostile intent in my response to Bob. In fact, I can assure you that I enjoy interacting with both of you guys the vast, vast majority of the time. I think you're wrong on some things... but I carry no anomosity for either of you. </font>[/QUOTE]I agree Scott - you were not being hostile at all in your post. You simply stated your beliefs on the matter. It was a pretty benign post in the scheme of things. Not sure what the fuss is all about?

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Scott J:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by webdog:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Brother Bob:
I wasn't accuseing you of attempted to agree or disagree with me. I was simply wanted to know what you said for I didn't understand it. (such hostility, don't understand it among Christians!!!!)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's the silent "H" in HTULIP, a common trait I see here on the BB by the reformers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You have a knack for seeing things that aren't there. There was absolutely no hostile intent in my response to Bob. In fact, I can assure you that I enjoy interacting with both of you guys the vast, vast majority of the time. I think you're wrong on some things... but I carry no anomosity for either of you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree Scott - you were not being hostile at all in your post. You simply stated your beliefs on the matter. It was a pretty benign post in the scheme of things. Not sure what the fuss is all about?

Wonder if the Lord will put us all in the same room in Heaven?

 

As long as there is not a silent H in Heaven, we should be ok!

 

I'm taking names.

 

I agree.

The "Flesh" see no problem with the things "IT" loves, this is where God's calling "CONVINCES" (convicts) the person's "mind/Heart" that they are in fact a "sinner".

And neither does man "lack" the ability to know good/evil and chose between the two, especially when God calls.

Let's take a look at those temptations.

The "Three temptations" Satan used are the three temptation that are the most problematic to man.

1Jo 2:16 For all that is in the world,

1. the lust of the flesh,
2. and the lust of the eyes,
3. and the pride of life,

is not of the Father, but is of the world.


1. the lust of the flesh,
Mt 4:2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.

3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.


2. and the lust of the eyes,
Mt 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.


3. and the pride of life,
Mt 4:6 And 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.


(Joh 19:36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.


In the garden, Jesus dreaded the suffering his flesh would endure, "Let this cup pass from me", but his "WILL" was stronger than the lust of the flesh to escape,

Jesus ask, "can you drink of the cup I drink of"???

"IF" we're to "Conform to his image", we too have to be "WILLING" to "crucify the flesh" to obtain his salvation. (drink of his cup)

When we surrender/sacrifice the flesh to God, (drink of his cup) the spirit can then control our life and we can "serve God".

Joh 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

Ga 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Ga 6:8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption;

but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

Jesus's "Whole life" is a picture of the plan of salvation for us, conforming to the image he sit in many ways.

 

And neither does man "lack" the ability to know good/evil and chose between the two, especially when God calls.</font>[/QUOTE] He can only choose good if he has good within himself. The darkness hates the light, remember? Now the question still stands, where did that goodness come from? The man to his own merit or from God to His great glory?

He was GOOD. He was divine. The unregenerate are neither.

And the implied answer at the point that He asked this question was NO.

Actually conforming has to do with sanctification not salvation. Nonetheless, the "why" of "conforming to his image" is given in Romans 8... and ultimately it isn't because we make an independent, self-driven decision.

And we will only do so... when goodness resides in us.

So now you believe in divine election? Jesus certainly was no accident... nor was His status with God the subject of a "free will" decision He made independent of God.

 

I do not think Jesus could have sinned. To be tempted does not mean there was the possibility of sin; the temptations show that Jesus was good and without sin.

The word for "tempt" also means to "test." If you test something that does not break, for example, it's to show it cannot break. Testing something does not mean there is a flaw. So just because Jesus was tested or tempted does not mean he was able to sin. The temptations and testings merely revealed his sinlessness.

This is a link to a good article on the impeccability of Christ for those interested in reading on it:
http://www.fbinstitute.com/McCormick/IMPECCABILITY.htm

 

OK, Let's take our "magic marker" and "blot out" the following verse.

Ro 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

Mt 16:24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, (crucify the flesh) and take up his cross, and follow me.

1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. (Jesus)

Re 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him,

Joh 3:3 Except a man be born again,(opens the door) he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Ro 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed,

Actually, the "comforming process" starts when we place our "faith" in Jesus, that includes being willing to crucify the flesh. (Drink of his cup, Submit to God's will, not my will but thy will)

Mt 13:8 But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold.

Mt 13:23 But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.

Mt 11:15 He that hath ears to hear, (wants to hear) let him hear.

I'd suggest reading the whole parable about the "sower" and the "seed".

Temptation can't exist without the possibility of fulfilling that temptation existing also, Jewsus chose the "eternal spiritual" rather than the "temporal earthly", the same choice set before man.

2Co 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Mr 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

Calvin has you blinded to the many "patterns" Jesus set for Christians to follow, not to mention understanding the plan of salvation.

 

OK, Let's take our "magic marker" and "blot out" the following verse.</font>[/QUOTE] That is one of the worst cases of the pot calling the kettle black I have ever seen. You ignore texts that clearly say God elected the saints before the foundation of the world. You evade the very reasonable and scripturally answerable question of "Why someone chooses as they do?" or else "What is the critical difference between you and the lost?"

Scripture clearly says that the "goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance."

You'll first note that I can afford to quote in context since my view accepts all of the points presented here.

You cannot tolerate a God that leads people to repentance however. If He doesn't allow them to do it themselves then He must be violating their rights.

Mt 16:24... Notably your answer was to quote other scriptures out of context rather than dealing with the one you had already quoted out of context.

11There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

Amen.... note that we are not born again by our decision. Note also "seed". That cross-references perfectly to my point about John 3 and new birth. God provides the "seed" without which conception cannot take place. Conception causes life... and is not caused by the will of the conceived whatsoever.

You only hurt your cause when you persist misusing scripture. The context of this verse is NOT individual salvation. The context is the churches of Asia- several of which needed reform.

"Born again" doesn't mean "opens the door". That idea is not found in the context or the words. You have literally attempted to write your man-centered interpretation between the lines of scripture.

Again, no need for us to strip these verses of their context or redefine words or deny the meanings of words.

Actually, the "comforming process" starts when we place our "faith" in Jesus, that includes being willing to crucify the flesh.</font>[/QUOTE] Yes... but that doesn't answer the question of why we place our faith in Jesus. Even after salvation, it is right to give glory for conforming us to God and not ourselves.

Exactly. Point to the "free will" choice to be good made by this soil. The ground was good by the will of God... not because the ground chose to be good. The seed was planted by a sower... the ground didn't choose it.

It was very literally the "nature" of this ground to be good while it was the "nature" of the other examples to NOT EFFECTIVELY RECEIVE THE SEED.

Are you really that impressed with your opinion? That is NOT what the text says. It doesn't say anything about wanting to hear. It says he that "hath"... That means it was something possessed prior to hear... not due to hearing.

I have.

I actually agree with you here. However, Jesus chose how He chose for a reason. He possessed divine goodness in His spirit.

The natural man receives not the things of the Spirit. He is not good at all. While Jesus always did the will of the father, the natural man seeks his own will and glory.

I don't follow Calvin. Calvin just happened to agree with this particular biblically sound doctrine and had his name attached to it.

Your exaltation of man has most certainly blinded you into thinking that man's salvation is ultimately dependent on his own independent decision... which is undeniably predicated on his own personal goodness. Yet this idea denies the whole idea of grace since man contributes/cooperates in order to create his own salvation.

 

"Irresistable calling" isn't "leading" but "forcing".

Has God "ever" "MADE" someone repent of their sins who didn't want to repent, NO.

Man only reaps what man sows, God doesn't sow the seed of man destruction, (Sovereign will) man sows that himself.

Mr 10:39 And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them, Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized:

Yes, but it must find "good ground" before it will germinate.

If anyone Fails to "open the door" to Jesus, no Jesus, no Spirit, no salvation.

Having "faith" won't pay the wages of sin, even if God "forces" us to believe, (irresistable call) sin still requires a death, are you claiming glory for believing or Jesus dying???

Ge 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground,

Do you know what the flesh is made from, "GROUND".

And when the seed finds "good ground", what happens???

1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

Totally depravity is denied by scripture in ways you, and calvin, quite obviously don't know.

[/qb] Are you really that impressed with your opinion? That is NOT what the text says. It doesn't say anything about wanting to hear. It says he that "hath"... That means it was something possessed prior to hear... not due to hearing.</font>[/QUOTE]Mt 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.

People don't always want to hear what is being said, the reason some are saved and some lost.

Jesus came to do the "will of the father", his "natural man" was tempted not to die, even praying a prayer that wasn't answered, "Let this cup pass from me", but following the "will of God" said, "nevertheless, NOT MY WILL BUT THY WILL

And no one will ever be saved except they say the same. that's when the "door is opened".

As I said, Faith won't pay the wages of sin, and Jesus's righteousness/God's spirit won't be imputed to a person until they "Surrender" the will/life of the flesh to God, only after that personal decision to open the door is made when God calls can/will a person be saved, not before, God doesn't "Force" man to be lost/saved, Jesus died for the sins of the whole world so the whole world "MIGHT BE" saved, but all doesn't accept the "FREE GIFT".


Your idea that faith will saved is misguided.

 

"Irresistable calling" isn't "leading" but "forcing".</font>[/QUOTE]No it isn't. And you still haven't answered what is different between you and someone who rejects Christ.

Are you better than they are? If you made the right choice and thus contributed to your salvation while they did not, what else could it be?

I agree. He gave him the "want to" by changing his spiritual nature from dead to alive.

He only "made" us repent in the same sense that birth "made" us breath and live.

Man only reaps what man sows, God doesn't sow the seed of man destruction, (Sovereign will) man sows that himself. </font>[/QUOTE] Then man by necessity can only reap unrighteousness... unless he is good of himself.

Mr 10:39 And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them, Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized: </font>[/QUOTE] And His implied answer was still NO for that time. They had not received the Holy Spirit.

Yes, but it must find "good ground" before it will germinate.</font>[/QUOTE] What makes you think that plant seed is being referred to? But even if that is your contention, the ground is not "good" because it willed to be so. It is good because someone else made it so.

If anyone Fails to "open the door" to Jesus, no Jesus, no Spirit, no salvation.</font>[/QUOTE] I know what you believe... my response was to your misuse of these scriptures. This "open the door" scriptue was not written to the unsaved it was written to churches. While it makes a wonderful sounding gospel appeal, it is not a sound basis for a doctrinal declaration.

Having "faith" won't pay the wages of sin,</font>[/QUOTE] But according to your position, the blood of Christ won't pay the wages of sin either unless empowered by your free will choice to have faith... made by you alone without God's interference.

"Forces" is a straw man that I have knocked over many times. Please either address my refutations of that ridiculous false innuendo or else stop using it.

He gets the glory for all.

Ge 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, </font>[/QUOTE] Another great point you've made for me. Did that particular dust choose to be Adam or did God make it into Adam with no respect to its "will" whatsoever?

Do you know that dirt still doesn't have a will?

The seed takes root and grows. The ground received the seed because it was consistent with its nature, not because it chose to.

No. Man's goodness is denied by scripture and you very well should know it. Christ's sufficiency is a also taught and you should know that as well.

Are you really that impressed with your opinion? That is NOT what the text says. It doesn't say anything about wanting to hear. It says he that "hath"... That means it was something possessed prior to hear... not due to hearing.</font>[/QUOTE]Mt 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.

People don't always want to hear what is being said, the reason some are saved and some lost. </font>[/QUOTE][/qb] Yes and for the umpteenth time, why do you say some want to while others don't? Are they good while those who don't are bad? That is a merit based system, not a system of grace.

Jesus came to do the "will of the father", his "natural man" was tempted not to die, even praying a prayer that wasn't answered, "Let this cup pass from me", but following the "will of God" said, "nevertheless, NOT MY WILL BUT THY WILL</font>[/QUOTE] Jesus had no "natural man". He was never "unsaved" because He never sinned nor was He of the seed of Adam. The natural man as used in Corinthians pertains to the spiritual condition.

Again, this "door is opened" stuff is extrabiblical and man-centered.

However you are right about the other statement. And one will not do so until there is genuine goodness within them... and that goodness comes from God, not from the man himself or else you have a right to claim merit for your salvation.

As I said, Faith won't pay the wages of sin,[/quote][/qb] Never said it would. It appropriates the atonement made by Christ. None the less, it is indispensible to salvation... and comes either due to God's making us good or else our being good on our own.

The only scripture you cited for that was in 1 John and I showed you where you stretched it too far due to a misunderstanding of the word "propitiation".

Why? If all are equally entitled and spiritually natured in a way that they could accept salvation if they wanted to then why do some do it while others don't?

I have give two options. Only one fits your system but you won't give it because you know it is unbiblical. Only one is biblical but you won't give it because you know it devastates your system.

Faith does save. For by grace are ye saved through faith. Faith is most certainly the God chosen means for accomplishing salvation in man. The question is why does one possess that faith while another does not.

 

He is unable to.