Posted on 07/29/2013 7:55:48 AM PDT by Gamecock
Question:
A non-Christian asked if we teach that Jesus was sinless because he did not have a human father, wasn't his human mother, Mary, sinful? Why wasn't her sin passed on to her son, Jesus?
Answer:
You ask an important question about the sinlessness and perfection of Jesus Christ.
As you suggest, if there is any way in which Christ partakes of sin, he is disqualified from being the only redeemer of God’s elect (Westminster Shorter Catechism, Q. 21). The testimony of Scripture about this is clear. Hebrews says that Christ was tempted in all points as we are, yet without sinning (Heb. 4:15). Christ challenged his adversaries to prove that he had sinned and they could not (John 8:46). As the apostle Paul put it, “For our sake he made him [Christ] to be sin, who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:21, cf. 1 Pet. 2:22, 1 John 3:5). He is a high priest unlike any other who is “holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens” (Heb. 7:26). His title as the Lamb of God (John 1:29) also draws our attention to his innocence.
The early church thought deeply about this as it formulated clear statements about Jesus Christ having two natures, a divine nature and a human nature, yet being one person. Christ unites in himself uniquely and in an unrepeatable way, this union (called the hypostatic union) of the human and the divine. This is the mystery of the Incarnation that the creeds of the church confess.
The way in which God answers your question is in the mystery of the virgin birth. The Scriptures begin from, what one theologian terms, “above” (Donald Macleod). John 1 or Philippians 2 show this movement from the eternal Son of God to the incarnate Son of God. This is how the Westminster Shorter Catechism summarizes it:
Christ, the Son of God, became man, by taking to himself a true body and a reasonable soul, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the Virgin Mary, and born of her, yet without sin. (Q. 22)
As Matthew described it, Mary was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit (1:18), and then the angel explained it to Joseph: “that which is conceived in her [Mary] is from the Holy Spirit” (1:20). The explanation to Mary herself, in response to her “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” (Luke 1:34), leaves any human agency out of the incarnation in the normal way of conception, for the angel tells Mary, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore, the child to be born will be called ‘holy’—the Son of God” (Luke 1:35). Without further description of how this would occur, the Bible testifies that the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary (the same idea as the cloud which overshadowed the Mount of Transfiguration) in such a way that she indeed became the bearer of the Holy One of God (Gal. 4:4); and her offspring, Jesus Christ, remained without sin. God does not specify in greater detail than this how the conception of Jesus by-passed Mary’s own sinfulness to preserve Christ’s sinlessness, but the rest of Scripture, as I indicated above, affirms that Christ did not inherit our sin nature. He came to be the Second Adam (Rom. 5) who could forgive sins because he himself was both the One offended and himself sinless.
The glory of the grace found in Jesus Christ is that though he was without sin, yet he had pity upon sinners so as to die in their place while we were enemies, ungodly, and sinful (Rom. 5:6, 8, 10). We need a Savior who is fully human to bear patiently with us, yet is able to atone for our sin as the final and perfect sacrifice. The sinlessness of Christ makes a passage like Isaiah 53:9–11 so marvelous in that Christ had no deceit in his mouth and by his death he made many to be accounted righteous.
I hope this is of some help.
It becomes even more clear when we don’t read into Scripture, but study His Word and let His Word direct our thinking. Greek is a fabulous language to clearly communicate His meaning.
You miss-read my mind lol. I do not think it is a punishment from God. I think is a consequence of our actions. God is warning us because He is omnipresent and sees the results.
If we live a life that pleases God, our children and their children will be more likely to live a life that pleases God.
If I live a sinful life, it is more likely my children and their children will live a sinful life.
God judges us on our actions only, which is what the scripture you posted states.
I sin, therefore the sin nature is passed to my grandchildren and their children.
May God our father lead us to His truth.
Like it or not, admit it or not, if you are a Christian in America you are a descendant of one of the branches of that tree. Go ahead and claim otherwise but the only one you’d be fooling is yourself.
And I would agree that as we all now live in a world that is well below paradise, we are subject to curses listed in Genesis that pre-fall Adam and Eve didn't encounter.
However:
One thing I am sure we can agree on: now that we know all have sinned and need a savior, let's share Jesus with them!
Now there is the level of study and forethought we have come to expect from Catholics. Did you really give much thought at all before you posted that? Do you not believe that there are and have been many gatherings (ecclesia) of Christians who have never been affiliated with any formal organization or denomination? Have they not converted those outside of the faith who now are Christians but still not affiliated with any formal organization or denomination and have never been?
In addition, regardless of whether someone was a part of any one of those organizations the fact that they have left that particular organization because they saw the error of the teaching is a testament to the work of the Holy Spirit in their lives. Scripture is replete with warnings to not associate with those “churches” who teach error. It would matter not which one of those organization one was brought up in as long as they have learned the true teaching of scripture and left them. They would then be no longer associated with them.
>>Go ahead and claim otherwise but the only one you’d be fooling is yourself.<<
How arrogant! No one today could possibly be a Christian, a true believer, follower of Christ without one of those organizations? And don’t give me that “without the Catholic Church no one would have the Bible” drivel. To think that God couldn’t have or wouldn’t have made sure His word was available for us today is pure arrogance and a total lack of faith in the very word of God.
Typical.
What you believe comes from that tree, regardless of your current affiliation or despite any lack thereof. You think you invented Christian theology or belief? No, it was passed down to you from the Apostles, intermixed with the errors and heresies of the branches of that tree you’ve inherited and imbibed.
There’s nothing new under the sun, including your amalgam of errors intermixed with an occasional Truth, which you got from the True Church and nowhere else.
Why are Catholics so loath to give God credit rather than man?
Christ built a Church, and gave it the Keys and authority to loose and bind. He did not write a book. Got a problem with that? Take it up with Him.
Let’s stop right there for a minute. There is no word in the original Greek used to write most of the New Testament that can realistically be translated “church”. There isn’t even a word that gives the concept of what most people think of as “church” today. The word “church” comes from kyridakon and is not found at all in the New Testament. The word that has been erroneously translated “church” is ekklesia and really had nothing to do with Christianity or religion per se. It simply meant a “called out group”. It was used for most any assembly of people whether they be civic or whatever.
What Christ was saying in Matthew 16:18 was that He was building His “called out” group of people and He was building that on the fact Peter had just stated, that He “was the Christ, the Son of the living God”. No where in the New Testament was there any commands or instructions of building some hierarchical structure the all of the denominations, including the Catholic Church, use today. Each local assembly was autonomous other than under Christ who is the head of all of the assemblies of believers. There is no reference in all of the New Testament of the “universal church” or even a “universal assembly” other than in Revelation when it is called the “bride of Christ”. Paul wrote to the “ekklesia” in different locations but never referred to what people today think of as the “universal church” because there wasn’t one and there isn’t one today that is sanctioned by Christ. The “universal church” is a man made concept and does not come from scripture.
In Revelation 2:6, 15, God said he "hated" the Nicolaitans who sought to set up a hierarchy to rule over the people. A study of the word Nicolaitans shows it to mean the bishops of the assemblies gained a victory (Nico) or conquest over the Laiton or the laity. Members were compelled to submit to the dominion of men. God states that that is something He hates. That describes all of the "denominations" today and in particular the Catholic Church.
Once people begin to realize that and stop following man perhaps they can begin to realize the error that exists in the concept of “church” today. The concept of the “universal church” is nothing more than a man made construct to usurp the authority of Christ and impose control over people.
The Bible defines “church” as two or more people coming together to worship God.
No, He didn't.
If you replace that "church" with assembly you are 100% correct. See my post 209
“And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
I’m always amazed when “Bible Christians” demand literal interpretations and adherence to the clear sense of scripture, except when it doesn’t suit their efforts at propaganda.
Isaiah 44:8, "Is there any God besides Me, or is there any other Rock? I know of none."
CynicalBear, the Catholic Religion, AKA the church of the magasterium, is built on many falsehoods. Claiming the Christ came to earth to start a church is one of the biggest.
Scripture is divided into two sections, the Old Testament/Covenant and New Testament/Covenant for a reason.
God the Father had a covenant with the people who worshiped Him. He established a physical earthly tabernacle with instructions as to whom would be priests. He discribed what they could sacrifice for multiple types of sins down to the tools they could use and the clothes they were to wear.
He also promised them a better covenant and a messiah.
Jesus the Christ is that messiah. He came to earth to live a sinless life, be beaten, put to death on a cross and then be raised from the dead. That qualified him to be a one time blood sacrifice for all our sins and be the Head Priest of the New Covenant spiritual church in heaven. God explains it well in Hebrews.
God made Jesus the head of that church, not Peter.
Jesus is our rock and salvation.
May God our Father lead us all to His truth, BVB
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.