Could Jesus have sinned?

[ImaginaryDay2]

On another forum, this topic was brought up:

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh

So, since Jesus was sent "in thelikeness of sinful flesh" (i.e. 'born with a fallen body/sin nature'), does that mean he had the capacity to sin, but merely resisted it?

*Disclaimer: Merely starting this thread does not imply my endorsement of this silliness.

 

[Lamb]

Jesus is God. To sin means to miss the mark and that mark is God's holy Law and His will...so no, Jesus could not go against Himself as God and do anything contrary to His holy will.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Romans 8:3 does not say that the Lord had/has a fallen-body/sinful-nature.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around what's being said in this other thread. Did Christ's mortal/human body "bear the stain of original sin"? (a quote from a poster on another forum). I've just never encountered this before.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around what's being said in this other thread. Did Christ's mortal/human body "bear the stain of original sin"? (a quote from a poster on another forum). I've just never encountered this before.

Some Adventists in the 19th century speculated that Jesus had a sinful-human-nature because they reasoned that he needed one to be "in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." [Hebrews 4:15] People can get very weird about the bible to make it fit their notions about what is right and just.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

Some Adventists in the 19th century speculated that Jesus had a sinful-human-nature because they reasoned that he needed one to be "in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." [Hebrews 4:15] People can get very weird about the bible to make it fit their notions about what is right and just.

That's the way the thread is going. The surprise is a rather staunch conservative Lutheran is supporting this.
Also, I thought the context of "without" in the verse was interesting:

Without association with sin, i.e. without yielding to sin, without becoming stained with it
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G5565&t=KJV

 

[MoreCoffee]

That's the way the thread is going. The surprise is a rather staunch conservative Lutheran is supporting this.
Also, I thought the context of "without" in the verse was interesting:

Adventist groups in the 19th century produced a lot of very bad theology. They did the conditional immortality thing as well as all sorts of strange end of days stuff and many were anti-trinitarian - their descendent groups are things like Christadelphians, Jehovah's witnesses, Branch Davidians, World Wide Church of God, and a bunch of others.

 

[Rens]

On another forum, this topic was brought up:



So, since Jesus was sent "in thelikeness of sinful flesh" (i.e. 'born with a fallen body/sin nature'), does that mean he had the capacity to sin, but merely resisted it?

*Disclaimer: Merely starting this thread does not imply my endorsement of this silliness.

His body had the capacity to sin, otherwise He wouldn't have to be obedient unto death. He (His human part) didn't want to die, while He came here because He wanted to die. If His flesh wasn't capable of sinning, satan wouldn't have to tempt Him. He never tempted the Father. He's not that stupid. But being God He (His Spirit) couldn't sin, so He listened to and obeyed the Father, not His flesh. And Paul said He was tempted the same way as us. If He had some holy incapable of sinning body, He wouldn't have been tempted or become really human at all. He's the second Adam, but He knew the Father, Adam didn't.

 

[Lamb]

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around what's being said in this other thread. Did Christ's mortal/human body "bear the stain of original sin"? (a quote from a poster on another forum). I've just never encountered this before.

Jesus did not have Original Sin since He was the unblemished Lamb.

Adam was created without Original Sin so Jesus too, being made in human likeness Philippians 2:7 (think Adam before the fall) was born without Original Sin. Now Adam COULD sin as we all know and he did. Jesus was in a way like Adam yet He is God and cannot do what is contrary to His will.

 

[psalms 91]

If He could not sin thenm what was the point of the temptation

 

[Lamb]

What do you mean what was the point? It's Satan's job to tempt. It was Jesus' idea to go into the desert to be tempted and that is part of the path of salvation for us to show His obedience in being our true perfect Messiah.

 

[MoreCoffee]

If He could not sin thenm what was the point of the temptation

One may be tempted without sinning. Saint James explains that. The Lord Jesus Christ was tempter but he did not sin. The temptations were external.

 

[Rens]

Romans 8:3 does not say that the Lord had/has a fallen-body/sinful-nature.

If He didn't have a fallen body He'd walk around like with the transfiguration and couldn't be killed. You can't kill a new body, He got that when He got resurrected. Doesn't mean He had sin in Him, just a normal body that was able to sin, were it not that He lived in it and said no. I think He had a body like Adam. Although it didn't have a sin nature it was able to sin.

 

[Rens]

He didn't want to die.
Would it have been sin if He hadn't died? If you can prevent everyone going to hell, but you love your own life more, it's not loving your neighbour as yourself.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

If He could not sin thenm what was the point of the temptation

See HERE

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

If He didn't have a fallen body He'd walk around like with the transfiguration and couldn't be killed. You can't kill a new body, He got that when He got resurrected. Doesn't mean He had sin in Him, just a normal body that was able to sin, were it not that He lived in it and said no. I think He had a body like Adam. Although it didn't have a sin nature it was able to sin.

We'd like to think so. But then again, we'd like him to be as human as we are. And he was. But without sin. Romans 8 bears this out. If we just take out our bibles and read, we can see that he was "in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin". Wow! he had the capacity to sin, and didn't??? Cool!

But it does not say "without sinning". Even if it did, context and use of the words are key. the use of 'without' implies that Christ was "Without association with sin, i.e. without yielding to sin, without becoming stained with it". It's there in the text. He had no association with, did not yield to, and did not become stained with sin.
Fully God and Fully man doesn't mean a capacity to sin, or being born with 'Original Sin/Sin Nature' It's just not in the passage that folks are using as a 'proof text'.

 

[Rens]

We'd like to think so. But then again, we'd like him to be as human as we are. And he was. But without sin. Romans 8 bears this out. If we just take out our bibles and read, we can see that he was "in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin". Wow! he had the capacity to sin, and didn't??? Cool!

But it does not say "without sinning". Even if it did, context and use of the words are key. the use of 'without' implies that Christ was "Without association with sin, i.e. without yielding to sin, without becoming stained with it". It's there in the text. He had no association with, did not yield to, and did not become stained with sin.
Fully God and Fully man doesn't mean a capacity to sin, or being born with 'Original Sin/Sin Nature' It's just not in the passage that folks are using as a 'proof text'.

Yes but Adam was also without sin, Jesus had to be tempted by the devil, not His own flesh or a sin nature. A body is just a thing with a will, it wants food. Then He said no to it, because it was a temptation from the devil. It was not that He had some body that didn't want to eat bread after 40 days of fasting. Theoretically He could sin, but He couldn't, since He's God and God can't sin. It's that He doesn't want to I think.
Hmm no I think I'm wrong.
What is born from God can't sin.

 

[psalms 91]

What do you mean what was the point? It's Satan's job to tempt. It was Jesus' idea to go into the desert to be tempted and that is part of the path of salvation for us to show His obedience in being our true perfect Messiah.

If He couldnt sin then obedience does not enter in, obedience involves choice. I agree that it was to show us what is possible as man and that sin can be avoided but in order to do that He had to be able to make that choice

 

[Lamb]

If He couldnt sin then obedience does not enter in, obedience involves choice. I agree that it was to show us what is possible as man and that sin can be avoided but in order to do that He had to be able to make that choice

Philippians 2:8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

Christ truly was obedient even though He was God and did not sin. How could God ever go against Himself?

 

[Rens]

If He couldnt sin then obedience does not enter in, obedience involves choice. I agree that it was to show us what is possible as man and that sin can be avoided but in order to do that He had to be able to make that choice

Yes, but on the other hand He couldn't do anything other but obey. What is born from God can't sin. God can't sin.