Just yes or no, was jesus born with a sin nature as we all have?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
A Human Sacrifice that Saves Those Under the Law by the Shed Blood of the Son of God
- Thread starter Steven Yeadon
- Start date
- Status
Jesus was born with the "human nature" (i.e., the "flesh") that we have. I already told you that there are only two natures mentioned in the Bible and I had no interest in a hypothetical third one.
Jesus had a sin nature in Him then, correct? He was in sinful flesh, affected by the Fall as we all were?
So was not perfect, nor sinless according to you?
No. Not a sin nature but the "flesh". And yes, the flesh as subject to corruption.
was Jesus corrupted then by the fall, as he would have had a sin nature by your explanation?
He had to have the Virgin birth in order to avoid pretty corrupted/tainted by the fall, correct?
Last edited:
First study these biblical teachings:
God subjected all of Creation to futility. Animals die. Disease spreads. This earth will pass away. All flesh perishes.The Logos became flesh. Jesus was born in "corruptible flesh". God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh.
Then realize that is what I'm saying.
Did jesus have a sin nature?
For if he had the same exact flesh that we all have, he would have been born with one!
Your argument is with Scripture, not me. Scripture says that Jesus was born as we are. He was born "flesh". Scripture gives us two natures - the "spirit" and the "flesh". Scripture says Jesus came in "corruptible" flesh. Scripture says God sent His Son in the likeness of "sinful flesh".
You say had the Jews not killed Jesus that Jesus would have lived forever. You say that we have a different "human nature" than Jesus. You introduce a hypothetical nature absent Scripture.
I already told you that I am not interested in philosophical arguments. I don't care if you hold them, but I'm just not interested. You can't fault me for believing that Scripture is correct in stating Jesus came as the Son of Man. You can't fault me for saying Jesus came in "corruptible flesh". You can't fault me for saying that God sent Him in the likeness of sinful flesh. You can't even fault me for believing that Jesus was subject to the same ailments that are common to mankind as God subjected all Creation to futility.
I just have no interest in your philosophy. I'm not faulting you for your ideas (except perhaps in ignoring a few doctrines of Scripture, but they are not something I'd bother arguing).
Adam was created without a sin nature, was morally perfect until His fall, jesus likewise was born without having a sin nature, correct?
You are confusing morality (which has to do with the will) with biology. Morality is not an aspect of one's nature but rather what one does with that nature.
We are born with a sin nature, bent away from God, correct? That is an enemy of God, at war with him, not willing to submit?
According to the Bible there are only TWO natures, the flesh and the spirit.....you know this, correct?
I know that Adam, before he fell, and jesus flesh was not corrupted by the Fall as yours and mine were!
If we are fallible and if continued special revelation has ended, then it is a mistake to rely on "what we know" apart from what is actually revealed in Scripture.....correct? And Scripture only offers the "spirit" and the "flesh" as the two natures...correct?
the flesh Adam was in changed after the fall, correct? As he had no sin nature in him before, but had one after?
No passage says that Adam's flesh was changed after the Fall. No verse says Adam's nature changed. We should not rely on human conclusion and hypothesis but on God's Word...correct?
We know that there was a corruption upon all flesh after the fall, as man obeyed God perfectly before the Fall, and were in their cin natures afterwards!
We are born sinners, correct?
Scripture does not say that there was a moral corruption upon all flesh, but that all sinned. Where are you getting these ideas about a third nature (a "sin nature") that is morally corrupt in and of itself (apart from sin)?
Adam was born morally perffectt, always obeyed the Lord, he choose to sin, became a sinner, and His physical children born after Him now have the sin nature passed along!
Do you have a sin nature?
If yes, did Jesus?
Everyone is born morally perfect. "Moral" is an adverb that has to do with principles of behavior or character. Unless you are suggesting that birth itself is an immoral behavior or that being human in and of itself is sinful then you have no ground (no biblical ground) upon which to stand.
This is the problem when we start getting into the hypothetical by engaging philosophical arguments. You are forced to reconcile Scripture to those arguments as the doctrines themselves are absent from the Bible. And this is why I have been telling you that my interest here starts and ends with Scripture (not philosophy). I have no interest in even entertaining the idea that sin is a biological issue.
- Status