Grace of Reformed Theology/R.C. Sproul

[Lodic]

That's fine. You believe Christ had to be capable of sinning to be the Last Adam. I disagree as there is nothing to base it on.

Quantrill

While I can't point to any specific passages, it's a logical conclusion that Jesus was capable of sin when He was a man. I get the argument that God can't sin. God also doesn't get hungry or tired, but Jesus experienced everything that we humans do.

 

[Yeshua1]

Never heard of "Lordship salvation". I believe that just as Adam was created a perfect, sinless man who was able to sin, so also Jesus came as the 2nd Adam - perfect and sinless. Where the 1st Adam gave in to temptation, the 2nd Adam did not. If Jesus was not capable of sin while He was a man, He could not have served as the 2nd Adam. But I digress. Still not connecting the dot regarding grace. I probably shouldn't burn brain cells trying to figure it out - I have so few, and I need to use them sparingly.

Jesus had NO sin nature in him, and was fully God also, so could not sin!

 

[Yeshua1]

Never heard of "Lordship salvation". I believe that just as Adam was created a perfect, sinless man who was able to sin, so also Jesus came as the 2nd Adam - perfect and sinless. Where the 1st Adam gave in to temptation, the 2nd Adam did not. If Jesus was not capable of sin while He was a man, He could not have served as the 2nd Adam. But I digress. Still not connecting the dot regarding grace. I probably shouldn't burn brain cells trying to figure it out - I have so few, and I need to use them sparingly.

Lordship salvation is term coined to describe views of Dr MacArthur, whose view is that in order to be saved, but believe in Jesus, and also must evidence fruit of that saving relationship!

 

[Quantrill]

What does unmerited favor mean to you?

Means unmerited favor. If you just want to play games, go somewhere else.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

While I can't point to any specific passages, it's a logical conclusion that Jesus was capable of sin when He was a man. I get the argument that God can't sin. God also doesn't get hungry or tired, but Jesus experienced everything that we humans do.

Just because God the Son, because He was given a body by which He could experience the draw of sin, and the suffering for not giving in to sin, doesn't mean He could have sinned. All that means is that Jesus can identify with our problem of sin. It doesn't mean He could have sinned.

No, Jesus didn't experience everything we humans do. He was human too, but He was God too. And He never experienced sin, other than paying for sins by being the sin bearer.

Quantrill

 

[Yeshua1]

Just because God the Son, because He was given a body by which He could experience the draw of sin, and the suffering for not giving in to sin, doesn't mean He could have sinned. All that means is that Jesus can identify with our problem of sin. It doesn't mean He could have sinned.

No, Jesus didn't experience everything we humans do. He was human too, but He was God too. And He never experienced sin, other than paying for sins by being the sin bearer.

Quantrill

Being sinless in his humanity, there was nothing in him to respond to temptations....

 

[AustinC]

Means unmerited favor. If you just want to play games, go somewhere else.

Quantrill

Q, the games are played by free-will person's who make grace a work.
I take it you struggle for a definition. Here's an easy definition of both grace and mercy. See if you agree.

Grace is God giving to us that which we do not deserve.

Mercy is God not giving to us that which we do deserve.

 

[Quantrill]

Q, the games are played by free-will person's who make grace a work.
I take it you struggle for a definition. Here's an easy definition of both grace and mercy. See if you agree.

Grace is God giving to us that which we do not deserve.

Mercy is God not giving to us that which we do deserve.

I have no problem with either definitions.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

Being sinless in his humanity, there was nothing in him to respond to temptations....

Being the God/Man, Christ could not sin.

You do realize in the first two temptations in (Matthew) satan focused on Christ's Deity. "If thou be the Son of God". (Matt. 4:3) (4:6) Both of these were satan using his power of deception in twisting the Scriptures. In other words, show me. Do something at my behest.

In the last temptation recorded in (Matthew) it is as though he cast aside all his deception and went for all the marbles and offered Christ all the kingdoms of the world in exchange for Christ to worship him. It is as though satan is saying, yes You are the Son of God. But if You sever Your submission to the Father, I will give You this. And it was his to give. (Luke 4:6)

Because Jesus was/is the God/Man, He could not sin. He as the God/Man could now suffer the temptations. Experience them. but He could not sin.

Quantrill

 

[Dave G]

While I can't point to any specific passages, it's a logical conclusion that Jesus was capable of sin when He was a man.

Shouldn't we base our thinking on what God's word declares, and not "logical conclusions"?

 

[Lodic]

Shouldn't we base our thinking on what God's word declares, and not "logical conclusions"?

We often draw logical conclusions when Scripture does not say explicitly say things - e.g. the doctrine of the Trinity. The Bible doesn't explicitly say that Jesus was incapable of sin when He walked the earth. Some people (such as yourself) hold the view that He could not, but it is a conclusion you have drawn. When it comes down to it, I don't believe it has any affect on our salvation or any Christian doctrine which view we take on this question.

 

[Dave G]

We often draw logical conclusions when Scripture does not say explicitly say things - e.g. the doctrine of the Trinity.

I agree.
Logically speaking, men sin and have the capability of it...therefore one would think that Christ, as a man, would have the capability for it.

But Jesus isn't "just" a man.
He is God.

The Bible doesn't explicitly say that Jesus was incapable of sin when He walked the earth.

I agree here as well.
But the problem is, we're going beyond what Scripture says in that, it never says He was capable of it or incapable of it.

It says He is God, it says He is man, and it says He did no sin.

 

[Dave G]

Some people (such as yourself) hold the view that He could not, but it is a conclusion you have drawn.

Once again, I agree.
I do believe that it is a conclusion ( understanding ) born out by Scripture, however...

But that is as far as I can currently take it.

When it comes down to it, I don't believe it has any affect on our salvation or any Christian doctrine which view we take on this question.

Yet again I tend to agree.
But to me there's another issue that pops up...

Should we, as believers, be taking on the question?
Is it profitable and does it lead to edification ( building one another up in the faith ), or does it lead to a "dead-end" and take us off-track from what is really important...
Christ crucified for sinners, and His saving us from ourselves.

To me, it is enough that Scripture tells us that He did no sin ( Hebrews 4:15 ).
Anything past what Scripture declares is speculation and I don't think it's worth speculating on, IMO.

 

[Lodic]

I agree.
Logically speaking, men sin and have the capability of it...therefore one would think that Christ, as a man, would have the capability for it.

But Jesus isn't "just" a man.
He is God.

I agree here as well.
But the problem is, we're going beyond what Scripture says in that, it never says He was capable of it or incapable of it.

It says He is God, it says He is man, and it says He did no sin.

Agreed, Brother. The question is not whether He did sin, but whether He was capable of sin. Scripture is not explicit on this point.

 

[Lodic]

Once again, I agree.
I do believe that it is a conclusion ( understanding ) born out by Scripture, however...

But that is as far as I can currently take it.

Yet again I tend to agree.
But to me there's another issue that pops up...

Should we, as believers, be taking on the question?
Is it profitable and does it lead to edification ( building one another up in the faith ), or does it lead to a "dead-end" and take us off-track from what is really important...
Christ crucified for sinners, and His saving us from ourselves.

To me, it is enough that Scripture tells us that He did no sin ( Hebrews 4:15 ).
Anything past what Scripture declares is speculation and I don't think it's worth speculating on, IMO.

You make an excellent point, sir. It is enough that He did not sin. This type of discussion is a distraction, along the lines of asking how many angels could dance on the point of a pin. Besides, I'm not 100% sure about that conclusion.

 

[Lodic]

Being the God/Man, Christ could not sin.

You do realize in the first two temptations in (Matthew) satan focused on Christ's Deity. "If thou be the Son of God". (Matt. 4:3) (4:6) Both of these were satan using his power of deception in twisting the Scriptures. In other words, show me. Do something at my behest.

In the last temptation recorded in (Matthew) it is as though he cast aside all his deception and went for all the marbles and offered Christ all the kingdoms of the world in exchange for Christ to worship him. It is as though satan is saying, yes You are the Son of God. But if You sever Your submission to the Father, I will give You this. And it was his to give. (Luke 4:6)

Because Jesus was/is the God/Man, He could not sin. He as the God/Man could now suffer the temptations. Experience them. but He could not sin.

Quantrill

Since theologians have been debating this question for centuries, we are not likely to solve it here except in our own minds. It is enough that Jesus did not sin.

 

[Quantrill]

Since theologians have been debating this question for centuries, we are not likely to solve it here except in our own minds. It is enough that Jesus did not sin.

Consider this. In (1 John 3:9) we are told that whoever is born of God cannot sin. We have His seed in us. That is proof that God sees that which is of Him as unable to sin.

Apply that to God the Son, the Man Jesus Christ. What other conclusion can one come to other than Christ was not able to sin?

Quantrill

 

[Lodic]

Consider this. In (1 John 3:9) we are told that whoever is born of God cannot sin. We have His seed in us. That is proof that God sees that which is of Him as unable to sin.

Apply that to God the Son, the Man Jesus Christ. What other conclusion can one come to other than Christ was not able to sin?

Quantrill

While you do make a good point, there is more to consider. When Satan tempted Jesus, he was tempting His human nature, not His divine nature. This would have been an exercise in futility if it had not been possible for Jesus to fall just as Adam fell. Jesus was not born with the sinful nature that we inherited as a result of Adam's fall. Then again, Adam was not created with a sinful nature either. God called all of His creation "very good". We are not likely to agree on this question, and that's okay. We do agree that He did not sin.

 

[Yeshua1]

Being the God/Man, Christ could not sin.

You do realize in the first two temptations in (Matthew) satan focused on Christ's Deity. "If thou be the Son of God". (Matt. 4:3) (4:6) Both of these were satan using his power of deception in twisting the Scriptures. In other words, show me. Do something at my behest.

In the last temptation recorded in (Matthew) it is as though he cast aside all his deception and went for all the marbles and offered Christ all the kingdoms of the world in exchange for Christ to worship him. It is as though satan is saying, yes You are the Son of God. But if You sever Your submission to the Father, I will give You this. And it was his to give. (Luke 4:6)

Because Jesus was/is the God/Man, He could not sin. He as the God/Man could now suffer the temptations. Experience them. but He could not sin.

Quantrill

Agree!

 

[Yeshua1]

Agreed, Brother. The question is not whether He did sin, but whether He was capable of sin. Scripture is not explicit on this point.

Can God sin?