Therefore He would not be qualified as a substitutionary atonement for the sin of all mankind, hence no real Gospel message exists.
Reductio ad absurdum,...wrong basis for His sinlessness***
Cvengr, I am not surprised to see no response. In a thread, awhile back, I asked this question; "Do you think a righteous God could/can condemn Adam and/us if He could not prove Adam or us could live a sinless life?"
I had several replies but none would give a yes or no answer. After several attempts with one individual I told them I would never ask them again and would list them in the column of those who would not give a yes or no answer.
For Jesus to be a second Adam, per Rom 5, He had to be just like Adam having free will and without a sin nature which is passed through the father. A virgin birth, no human father, is all that is needed to accomplish that.
Adam used his freewill to disobey God. Jesus used His free will to obey God.
God's Christ is proof a man can live a sinless life.
May God our Father lead us to His truth, BVB
We generally agree. The issue of my disagreement before resides in the doctrines of kenosis and hypostatic union. As God, He obviously is without sin, but His sinlessness is more significantly due to His remaining in fellowship with the Father, until He was made sin for us.