He had no nature that compelled Him to sin, while all the rest of us do!
-
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!
Was Jesus human like us or a different kind of human?
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
We are born as sinners, he was not!
So you are not a sinner?
The scripture passages upon which we base the doctrine of "original sin" OR the inherited sin nature with which we are born have been repeated over and over Jon.
You can go back and look them up and then state your disagreement with our view.
BTW Jon, do you parrot in agreement with the doctrine of the Trinity (which has no singular proof text if you reject 1 John 5:7) developed by the Nicean Council?
Hi bro. Hank! I'm not sure why you replied to my comment to Yeshua1. My point is I'd like for him to discuss Scripture. Why the attack on me? I can show several texts about the trinity and bring up historical info (Turtellian) about the trinity before Nicaea. So, parroting wouldn't be a tactic I would use. You bring up Scripture, Good on you. And I agree with what you post. I do not agree on all the aspects of said "sin nature" and "original sin", but it's obvious we are spiritually lifeless apart from Christ. Ephesians 2:1-3 tells us the effects of the fall--which never talk about any inability to respond to the Gospel of Christ.
Not to mention...The topic is Jesus and His humanity. He keeps on discussing, IMO, irrelevant concerns.
Y and I agree on the sin nature of man which is IMO very relevant to the subject of Jesus and His humanity that is why i answered.
also
Tertullian was a Latin father and would have used the Old Latin version of the bible which includes 1 john 5:7 (almost universally rejected by modern scholars) So there is no proof text for the Trinity apart from 2 15th century Greek mss.
i used the subject of the Trinity to prove that some doctrines are a product of tradition (howbeit extrapolated from various scriptures)..
the church was divided between the Arian and Trinitarian view until Nicaea then it was split.
both Baptists and the Church of Rome accept the Athanasius view of the Trinity (a composite doctrine)
There are 2 proof texts for man's inherited sin nature.
So the sin nature of man is not traditional but a very old view of scripture passages (Romans 5:12; Psalm 51:5).
So do you believe Jesus' humanity was different than our humanity?
His is different than mine. I did not eternally preexist my earthly birth also i had two human parents.
How about you?
His humanity was the same as mine. And now we have what He had to control His person and stay in the will of God...2 Peter 1:4.
Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
So He was less human? Half human? Not Human?
I have now and forever will have two earthly human parents. Jesus did not.
No mater what I have now this fact will never change.
he was human. Holy from conception.
Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God.
As opposed to us.
Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
If I understand you correctly, I agree.
I'm not going to make hard claims here, but I want people to think a little more carefully about the presupposition in much of Christian theology that an unfallen human somehow possesses immortality on his own. The "tree of life" is a symbol of God sustaining humankind in the garden and in all eternity after the final judgment and the restoration of all things.
Jesus certainly aged while He walked upon the earth in his life and ministry, and I'm sure His skin received damage from the sun, His feet and hands had callouses, and He may have had other scars on His body besides the ones inflicted in His passion. His body was as vulnerable to injury as ours, and needed sleep, food, water, clothing, and regular grooming.
One problem that I see speaking with fellow Christians (and on this board) is that superficially many repeat "100% man, 100% God" while in application they (probably unknowingly) reject Jesus as being a man. Scripture, however, is very clear that Jesus experienced the trials, temptations, and desires (natural desires) that is common to man, yet in all of this he did not sin. This is why he can empathize with us, and is one point to which the author of Hebrews appeals in explaining his qualification as High Priest. He truly was one of us.
I believe that Jesus had, on one level, a desire not to die. He desired to eat when hungry, even when fasting. I'm sure he had a natural attraction to women, probably a desire at some level to marry and live a comfortable life. This would be expected, and it wouldn't be sinful. Yet Jesus remained obedient and submitted this will (the desires of the flesh) in obedience to do the will of the Father. He desired to do the Father's will, to do that which he came to do.
Regardless as to the degree of desire and temptation, it seems that many have made Christ a mythological human in order to highlight his divinity. He becomes a "superman" rather than one of us, capable of saving only other superhuman beings, although I don't believe they identify this problem in their argument (as, again, superficially they will affirm that Christ is "human").
Agreed. Eternal Life is only bestowed by God to those He places in eternal union with Himself in Reconciliation. The Tree of Life in either Garden did not, and will not give eternal life. We have eternal life in us because He Who is Eternal is in us.
God bless.
Was Jesus human like us or a different kind of human?
This issue along with many has become a source of contention.
Theologically it is called The Impeccability of Christ or (to get to the point) as my theology professor asked the class (he liked to address us as "class").
"Class, was Jesus not able to sin or able not to sin?"
Not able to sin - was his answer being a prof in a school/seminary of orthodoxy (Calvary University, KCMO).
Unfortunately some folks get around to condemning each other of opposite view, usually by innuendo or in an oblique way.
But sometimes directly.
On one side - If not able to sin, He was not human.
The other - If able not to sin, He was not deity.
This issue along with many has become a source of contention.
Theologically it is called The Impeccability of Christ or (to get to the point) as my theology professor asked the class (he liked to address us as "class").
"Class, was Jesus not able to sin or able not to sin?"
Not able to sin - was his answer being a prof in a school/seminary of orthodoxy (Calvary University, KCMO).
Unfortunately some folks get around to condemning each other of opposite view, usually by innuendo or in an oblique way.
But sometimes directly.
On one side - If not able to sin, He was not human.
The other - If able not to sin, He was not deity.
- Status