Pristine Grace
Page 1 of 2 1 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: COULD He??

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Gun Barrel City, Texas
    Posts
    530
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    COULD He??

    Was it in any way possible for Jesus to have sinned? We know He did NOT, but "COULD" he have?
    Why or why not?
    2 Timothy 4:2-4
    <(((><
    1 Peter 3:15
    __________________

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    461
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    He was God, clothed in flesh.

    Can God sin?
    "SOLA SCRIPTURA… GRATIA… FIDE… CHRISTUS… DEO GLORIA" Scripture alone, being our final authority, teaches us that salvation is by grace His grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, for the glory of God alone.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    55
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    He was fully man. Can man sin?
    Peter

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    461
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Man is born in sin, born of flesh that is fallen...

    This doesn't apply to the One who was born without sin...
    "SOLA SCRIPTURA… GRATIA… FIDE… CHRISTUS… DEO GLORIA" Scripture alone, being our final authority, teaches us that salvation is by grace His grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, for the glory of God alone.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    55
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    If he did not have the capacity to sin, he would not have been fully man, which he was. And, I dont agree with Augustine's view of original sin.
    Peter

  6. #6
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,833
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    148
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    94
    Thanked in
    62 Posts
    So, Peter, do you believe Jesus sinned?
    This is my signature.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    461
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Originally posted by Peter
    If he did not have the capacity to sin, he would not have been fully man, which he was. And, I dont agree with Augustine's view of original sin.
    You know, we could go back and forth about this for years, but I have no desire to do that.

    I simply do not believe Jesus, who was God in the flesh, was capable of committing sin, anymore than I believe God can allow any form of sin into His presence.

    As for Augustine's view on original sin, I really don't know why you brought him up, my comments have to do with what the Bible says, not what a man says, or thinks.

    If others care to debate this out... more power to them
    "SOLA SCRIPTURA… GRATIA… FIDE… CHRISTUS… DEO GLORIA" Scripture alone, being our final authority, teaches us that salvation is by grace His grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, for the glory of God alone.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    55
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Aboslutely not! Just dont buy Augustine's view of original sin and how it's passed on, that's all. I also believe in the total humanity/total divine nature of Christ. One nature did not swallow the other.
    Peter

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Gun Barrel City, Texas
    Posts
    530
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I believe that Jesus couldn't have sinned. This really is a much deeper question into the nature (or "dual-nature") of Jesus. I don't think you can seperate the two. He was fully God and fully man. You can't seperate the two. If you do, you diminish who and what He is. Besides, Jesus is God, right? Well...what in the world could have possibly even seemed appealing to Him?

    Perhaps another question is in order then.

    Why did Satan, knowing Jesus is God and cannot sin, even try? What did he hope to accomplish? Or, did Satan not totally understand exactly who Jesus was?
    2 Timothy 4:2-4
    <(((><
    1 Peter 3:15
    __________________

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    18
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I believe that we shouldn't be judging anyone let alone our Savour....

    Im not trying to be disrespectful to you guys, but i dont think we have the capacity or the decency as people to answer or consider a question like that...

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Gun Barrel City, Texas
    Posts
    530
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Nobody is judging Jesus. It is a field of study called Christology. The study of Christ, the study of Him, His life, His nature. It is speculation, because since we are not Him, nor God, nor perfect, but it is a very legitimate study and a valuable one. For as we study Him, we learn and know Him better. I honestly don't think Jesus is offended because I pose this question. I think, if we pose a question with the intent of learning and knowing Him, and we pose a question honestly and sincerely and not in a disrespectful manner, I think that is a good think and He honors that.
    I appreciate your opinion, but disagree with it. Maybe we don't have the capacity to answer that for reasons I listed about (we are not God) but it really isn't a decency issue or a disresepct issue toward Him.
    2 Timothy 4:2-4
    <(((><
    1 Peter 3:15
    __________________

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    135
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    If God created humans as man and woman (It's not good for man to be alone), then why didn't Jesus marry? You would think in order to be a perfect example for the human race Jesus would have done EVERYTHING that we are SUPPOSED to do including marry. Why then, don't all good believers stay single just as Jesus did? Never mind what Paul said about the topic.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I think it was possible for Jesus to sin. i believe this because he would of had to have been possible or He would not of been a perfect sacrifice. Also if not there would of been no reason for the tempting by the devil. However i think that He did not because in a way it was impossible for Him to sin. Before you say i have sontradicted myself hear me out See to sin was completely against His nature so He did not. He could of if it was in His nature though. No one would of stopped Him. So it was theoretically possible but practically impossible. Here is a question though. Can God sin? I know God can do whatever He wants but can He sin. I say no because whatever He does would not be a sin becasue He did it. It would be His will.

    Edwin

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Posts
    125
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    There are two very distinct natures to this Man-God: the man constituent, His fleshly nature, and the God element, His deity.

    Jesus the man had to have a life beginning. It is only common sense that death must occur before one can be raised to life. If you don’t have life you can never have death, and it was Jesus’ very purpose on earth to be born in order to die. It was the master plan that Jesus would forever change the destiny of man by shedding His pure and precious blood on that old rugged cross for the redemption of human kind. The reason, as Martin Luther stated, that Jesus’ blood was sufficient to cleanse sin is because Jesus was both God and man. It would have to be God’s blood shed: man’s would never do. God’s blood had to be shed, because only God’s blood is pure from sin and worthy of its recompense.

    The blood of anything that God had previously created would never be sufficient for this accomplishment. This is the very reason why, in the Old Testament, the blood sacrifice of anything before Christ's death on the cross was only temporary and had to be repeated over and over for everlasting results.
    Jesus had to separate His fleshly nature from His deity so that man would understand it was not His human side or His man-nature that was holy and worthy of worship. No man is worthy of worship. No man can redeem sin, answer prayer, or offer eternal life as does Jesus Christ--only God can in His regal omnipotence.

    II. Cor. 5:21 says, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”
    Peace on earth and good will to all men is not just for Christmas. Peace, Jep

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    330
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I believe, as the bible says, that Jesus was tempted in all ways as we are. ie he WAS tempted. but he did not and cld not sin.

    Why cld not? Becos he did not inherit the fallen nature that we all do. Science now tells us that when a baby is conceived, all the blood comes from the male/father, none come from the mother. That's why Jesus had to be supernaturally conceived by the Holy Spirit. So since all of his blood came from the Holy Spirit, he did not inherit any original sin. and that's why his blood qualifies to clean us of all sin!

    Now in the end, Jesus did do something WORSE THAN to sin! On the cross, he did not just take on our sins, he BECAME SIN, he BECAME CURSE itself. that something else altogether.

    plus the fact that becos of this he lost the Father-Son relationship for the first time (for for the first time he addressed God as God and not Father "O God O God, why has thou forsaken me" - God turned his back on Jesus - He was rejected so that you and i cld be accepted, he lost the Father-Son relationship so that you and I may call ABBA FATHER!)

    these 2 things -- a HOLY God becoming SIN itself, plus losing that Father-Son relationship -- are what Christ sufffered the most!

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    135
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Originally posted by Andrew
    Science now tells us that when a baby is conceived, all the blood comes from the male/father, none come from the mother. That's why Jesus had to be supernaturally conceived by the Holy Spirit. So since all of his blood came from the Holy Spirit, he did not inherit any original sin. and that's why his blood qualifies to clean us of all sin!
    I don't know what "science" class you learned this in, but it's absurd. You may be thinking of blood TYPE. Here's a couple links that explain it.

    http://www.biology.arizona.edu/human...s/markers.html

    http://emuseum.mnsu.edu/biology/evol...variation.html

    The only way ALL of a baby's blood could come from it's father is by a complete transfusion. Did the Holy Spirit somehow take on male genetic attributes to fertilized Mary's egg? Unless you agree that Mary was without sin, her DNA would also be "tainted". This idea you present sound like something right out of the Vatican PR machine. Learn to back up what you say with valid references before showing yourself to be even more ignorant of the science you so embrace with the arms of a Judas.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    330
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    You are right questian. but your last insult was uncalled for.

    I got mixed up. What i meant to say was that we now know that the mother's placenta does not supply blood (only nutrients ) to the foetus as previously thot/believed. This old belief made many wonder how Jesus' blood cld have been pure.

    So I actually believe that Mary's conception was totally by the power of the Holy Spirit and of the Holy Spirit. ie the Holy Spirit put everything necessary (all the cells and dna) into the womb, ie nothing came from Mary in the conception process.

    I believe this wld have to be so becos if Mary had a part to play in the genetic make-up of Jesus, than He cld not have been a spotless Lamb without blemish, bcos He wld have inherited some genetic faults of Mary. Also, it wld not have been pure grace of God since Mary wld have had something to boast.

    Now I hope you still dont think that I'm promoting the RC doctrines of Mary, with the arms of Judas.

  18. #18
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,833
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    148
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    94
    Thanked in
    62 Posts
    Originally posted by questian
    Learn to back up what you say with valid references before showing yourself to be even more ignorant of the science you so embrace with the arms of a Judas.
    Hey bud, tone it down a bit. That was a tad mean, and well, maybe it could have been rephrased a bit better.

    Brandan
    This is my signature.

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    135
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Okay, I'll rephrase it. Scientific knowledge is ignored as ungodly "teachings of men" unless it conveniently supports some far-fetched idea based on nothing more than speculation.

    So I actually believe that Mary's conception was totally by the power of the Holy Spirit and of the Holy Spirit. ie the Holy Spirit put everything necessary (all the cells and dna) into the womb, ie nothing came from Mary in the conception process.
    Who's conception are you referring to, Mary's or Jesus'? I assume you mean Jesus'.

    I believe this wld have to be so becos if Mary had a part to play in the genetic make-up of Jesus, than He cld not have been a spotless Lamb without blemish, bcos He wld have inherited some genetic faults of Mary. Also, it wld not have been pure grace of God since Mary wld have had something to boast.
    If so, then Jesus would not have been the least bit human, merely an incarnation, and could not share anything in common with humanity.

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Posts
    125
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    “Okay, I'll rephrase it. Scientific knowledge is ignored as ungodly "teachings of men" unless it conveniently supports some far-fetched idea based on nothing more than speculation.”

    ME: Hmmm.....what could he mean by this? Examples, please.......
    Peace on earth and good will to all men is not just for Christmas. Peace, Jep

Page 1 of 2 1 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •