How could God sin? I didn't even
want to put the question mark in.
How could God sin? I didn't even
want to put the question mark in.
(As Hilary would say) “What difference does it make?”
He didn’t. SO there
Next - Can God make a rock so big he cannot lift it?
What would theology be today if there were no robots?
He was guilty of only one thing:
Love in the first degree.
Luke 4:20-21
20And He closed the book, gave it back to the attendant and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21And He began to say to them, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.”
Jesus is both natural man, being born of a woman, and spiritual man, being born of God. It’s why he is called both Son of man and Son of God.
And we also are both natural and spiritual.
I think Jesus refusal to sin, even though he was met with the same temptations as the rest of us with a natural nature is similar to my experience, of late, with all you can eat chinese food.
Here’s how it works:
When I was younger, I LOVED all-you-can-eat chinese for all sorts of reasons, but I always felt lousy for hours after gourging myself.
So I am of two minds before I make the decision to get the food: It’s really good and I’ll really enjoy it, but I’m gonna feel lousy afterward. Think of the former as the “natural” man not caring about the consequences but wanting that yummy food. And he is at war with the “spiritual” man who knows that in the long run I am going to be sorry I at the food.
As I have gotten older, the latter wins. The former submits because he has been controlled by the wisdom of the “spiritual”.
So, Jesus knew what was on the line. He saw hot women. He saw chances to save himself and destroy the plan, but the spiritual side successfully subdued the human side.
And how fierce was this battle? He sweat blood.
A presupposition does not a truth make but it sure can shape your lens.
“For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who in every respect has been tested as we are, yet without sin.” (Heb. 4:15, NRSV; cf. 2:18).
I’ll keep the above and whoever wants can keep all those other words (there are a lot).
As scripture testifies, His seed remained within Him ... when Moses received the tablets, he brought humankind a written description of what God IS NOT ... God is not a liar, therefore He cannot lie. We humans on the other hand ...
Seriously though, anyone who questions just one religion (Judeo-Christianity) and ignores Islam is suspect in my book.
Christ on Earth was both fully human and fully divine.
Humanity is able to sin.
His divine nature allowed him to transcend his humanity.
Blaspheme of the highest order.
Considering that “temptation” is a sin...
Hebrews 4:15- “For we have as high priest, not one who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has been tested in all respecs like ourselves, but without sin”. And
1 Peter 2:22 - “He committed no sin, nor was deception found in his mouth”.
The answer is NO.
It seems the tension is between Jesus’ humanity and his deity. If he is truly human, he is capable of sin but resisted it perfectly. But as deity, he is incapable of sin so doesn’t that counter his humanity and capacity to sin.
I once heard an explanation that I found very satisfying. It goes like this. In his humanity, Jesus’ resisted all temptation to sin so his deity, which would have prevented sin, was a backstop against sin that was never reached or needed.
This maintains his humanity and his sinlessness while retaining his perfection as deity.
Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has ascended into heaven, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. 15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been TEMPTED in every way, just as we are—YET HE DID NOT SIN. 16 Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.
Yet he did not sin.
That is the key- YET. He did not sin.
He might have enjoyed the occasional non fat free yogurt, but that is it.
However, the point is that He did not, and which is thrice confirmed, and it is the manner of the Holy Spirit to make known notable deviations from the norm among its characters:
From the age of Methuselah to the strength of Samson to the number of toes of Goliath, to the diet of John the Baptist, to the notable chaste holiness of Anna, to the supernatural transport of Phillip, to the signs of an apostle, to the sinlessness of Christ, to the singleness of Paul and Barnabas, and uncharacteristic duplicity of Peter, etc., etc.
In contrast is the sinlessness of Mary and perpetual virginity, departures from the norm among a quite important figure. But Roman Tradition does not need actually Scriptural evidence.
`
I am really torn on this.
On one hand He was fully God, so no.
On the other he was fully man, so yes.
He was under the same charge as Adam was.
Adam lived in Paradise and sould not keep one law.
Jesus was in a fallen world and kept them all.
Adam had all he needed.
Jesus lived in the wilderness and suffred all sorts of needs.
All I know is I thank God for the Second Adam.