Could Christ Have Sinned? III

[SavedByGrace]

Why don't you explain it for me? I'm well-versed in Greek.

μανθάνω, second aorist, is here used for "to be in the habit of, accustomed to" (Thayer); "acquire the habit of, be accustomed to" (Abbott-Smith); "acquire a habit of, and in past tenses, to be accustomed to" (Liddell & Scott).

 

[Reynolds]

You are the only one bringing up philosophical speculations about omnipotence here. The Bible says God is eternal, the Bible says Jesus is God, and the Bible says Jesus died. That's the point.

The point is you are arguing a classic philosophical, not purely theological, question that has no answer in the realm for which you seek an answer.

 

[SavedByGrace]

The point is you are arguing a classic philosophical, not purely theological, question that has no answer in the realm for which you seek an answer.

He cannot grasp what the Bible actually teaches on the Person of Jesus Christ. His basic reasoning is flawed

 

[Yeshua1]

He cannot grasp what the Bible actually teaches on the Person of Jesus Christ. His basic reasoning is flawed

Seems there are some here who seem to have Jesus in some regards as be less than the father!

 

[SavedByGrace]

Seems there are some here who seem to have Jesus in some regards as be less than the father!

Yes which is rank heresy!

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes which is rank heresy!

Interesting that the Jewish leaders had no problem seeing that Jesus was claiming to be God, but some of us today seem to!

 

[Tsalagi]

The point is you are arguing a classic philosophical, not purely theological, question that has no answer in the realm for which you seek an answer.

The "realm" in which I am seeking and finding answers is the Word of God. As I said, reasoning from the Scriptures is a good thing (Acts 17:2, 17).

You seem to be reading your philosophical assumptions about divine omnipotence into my question about the human nature of Christ. You're welcome to go in that direction, of course, but it is incorrect to claim that I am arguing your "classic philosophical" speculation. I have made no such argument. I'm observing what Scripture says about Jesus in His first advent and drawing conclusions from it.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Interesting that the Jewish leaders had no problem seeing that Jesus was claiming to be God, but some of us today seem to!

Indeed

 

[Tsalagi]

Interesting that the Jewish leaders had no problem seeing that Jesus was claiming to be God, but some of us today seem to!

Anyone saying Jesus was not fully God today would have to be unaware of Colossians 2:9.

 

[SGO]

Some are saying Jesus is God, you dope!
No one on either side is saying Jesus is not God which is happily being accused.
Why not even bother to admit there is more than one view and that does not make heresy except for the ones who are too proud to admit that there could be complimentary views.

Personal Union of Two Natures
“Hypostatic union” sounds fancy in English, but it’s actually a simple term. Hypostatic means personal. The hypostatic union is the personal union of Jesus’s two natures.

What Is the Hypostatic Union?

 

[Tsalagi]

Some are saying Jesus is God, you dope!
No one on either side is saying Jesus is not God which is happily being accused.
Why not even bother to admit there is more than one view and that does not make heresy except for the ones who are too proud to admit that there could be complimentary views.

Personal Union of Two Natures
“Hypostatic union” sounds fancy in English, but it’s actually a simple term. Hypostatic means personal. The hypostatic union is the personal union of Jesus’s two natures.

What Is the Hypostatic Union?

I assume you are calling me a "dope," but your post is so garbled I can't figure out why.

 

[SGO]

No, Mr. Tsalagi, only those that are screaming Jesus is God and used His divine nature and not His humanity to resist sin.
Feel free to call me a dope if you wish.

Everyone on either side of this issue thinks Jesus is God.

 

[Reynolds]

The "realm" in which I am seeking and finding answers is the Word of God. As I said, reasoning from the Scriptures is a good thing (Acts 17:2, 17).

You seem to be reading your philosophical assumptions about divine omnipotence into my question about the human nature of Christ. You're welcome to go in that direction, of course, but it is incorrect to claim that I am arguing your "classic philosophical" speculation. I have made no such argument. I'm observing what Scripture says about Jesus in His first advent and drawing conclusions from it.

I really think you have not much clue what you are doing.

 

[Tsalagi]

I really think you have not much clue what you are doing.

Ii's quite clear you have not much clue what I am doing. Shalom.

 

[Tsalagi]

μανθάνω, second aorist, is here used for "to be in the habit of, accustomed to" (Thayer); "acquire the habit of, be accustomed to" (Abbott-Smith); "acquire a habit of, and in past tenses, to be accustomed to" (Liddell & Scott).

I assume you're trying to make a point?

 

[SavedByGrace]

Ii's quite clear you have not much clue what I am doing. Shalom.

yeah, most of us don't, and seeing what you write, neither do you!

 

[SavedByGrace]

I really think you have not much clue what you are doing.

totally agree!

 

[SavedByGrace]

I assume you are calling me a "dope,"

if the cap fits, etc

 

[SavedByGrace]

I assume you're trying to make a point?

I am, but you won't undersatnd.

 

[Tsalagi]

I am, but you won't undersatnd.

My subject is Jesus, and the glory of His faith and obedience, living in the power of the Holy Spirit and the light of the Word of God, setting a perfect example in His earthly life for all of us.

You've spent over half a dozen posts here talking about me. If you're more interested in me than in my subject, feel free to start a fresh thread. This one is about the incarnate Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, and His choice to reject sin because of His love for the Father and for us.