It is not that hard to explain.Its not been given you to understand truth. I can explain, explain untill I'm Blue in the face, you wont understand it, its like talking to a corpse
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It is not that hard to explain.Its not been given you to understand truth. I can explain, explain untill I'm Blue in the face, you wont understand it, its like talking to a corpse
Did Jesus have the knowledge of Good and Evil?Does the bible say Jesus had a sin nature ?
Okay then start at the OP and then from there all of my other explanationsIt is not that hard to explain.
I am asking for your take on man's objective while on earth?Okay then start at the OP and then from there all of my other explanations
You say: "Jesus did not have the same ability to succumb to sins temptation", so how could Jesus be tempted in every way as we are tempted?
The idea is not to give Jesus certain powers over sin, we cannot have, making it God's fault for our sinning, since God did not provide those powers to us, but show even though Christ could, He did not, just as we could, but did because we lack His Love.
What does it matter where the "knowledge of Good and Evil" came from, since it is being equated in your definition with a sinful nature?
I am saying our knowledge changed with Adam and Eve's eating the fruit, but our "nature" remained the same. "Knowledge", itself is not bad, since we agree Christ had that same knowledge and did not sin. It is wrong to blame our sins on "Knowledge" and call it our nature.
But they were chosen to believe in Him
You say: "Jesus did not have the same ability to succumb to sins temptation", so how could Jesus be tempted in every way as we are tempted?
The idea is not to give Jesus certain powers over sin, we cannot have, making it God's fault for our sinning, since God did not provide those powers to us, but show even though Christ could, He did not, just as we could, but did because we lack His Love.
What does it matter where the "knowledge of Good and Evil" came from, since it is being equated in your definition with a sinful nature?
I am saying our knowledge changed with Adam and Eve's eating the fruit, but our "nature" remained the same. "Knowledge", itself is not bad, since we agree Christ had that same knowledge and did not sin. It is wrong to blame our sins on "Knowledge" and call it our nature.
That is a unique take on the "sin nature" and if that is what we are talking about I fully agree with you but would explain further. Does this make knowledge into nature (something natural in humans)?
Yes! we have the Law written on our hearts and our conscious do burden us, when we hurt others.
There is nothing "wrong" with knowledge in and of itself, so did Jesus have this "sin nature"? Everyone thinks Jesus had the knowledge, but few feel He had a "sin nature", so what do you think?
You said: “Having the ability to not sin…”, so can we have that “ability” while here on earth and what would provide that ability?
Having the ability to not sin, does not discount that even though Jesus could not sin. He was still tempted like we are. He was tempted like we are, because His temptation came from satan and in our case more than likely satan and fallen angels.
Wow, this brings up the whole: Earthly reign, which I like many others do not agree with.Why do you think satan is locked up during Jesus earthly rule. So Jesus can rule humanity and only have to rule against mans sinful nature, without satan adding to the problem.
There are no equivalent “English words” for every Greek word and the Greek has gender to help you which is not translated into the English. There are good reasons for the Greek scholars to not put one literal mean to each Greek word, because one Greek word can have many English words translations and have the need to add English words or you cannot understand what was said.Noticed the words in Italics they are not in the original Greek
For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.
The Greek reads
Not for we have a high priest not being able to sympathize with the weaknesses of us [one] having been tempted however in all things by the same way without sin
You ask: “Jesus had a sin nature or the ability to sin where did this come from”, how about the same place Adam and Eve’s ability to sin came from (Adam was begotten by God, but where do you find Jesus begotten by anyone?)If Jesus had a sin nature or the ability to sin where did this come from. since He was begotten from God and not Adam.
Not sinning does not mean you are incapable of sinning.
Not sure I am following you here. Adam and Eve knew lots of stuff (had knowledge).-I am re-reading this post of yours and noting something you did. I stated Adam pass down the knowledge of good and evil to humanity, but you end up just making it about knowledge, which is not what is stated.
Adam had knowledge before He sinned, so knowledge did not make him a sinner.
When you have nothing to be ashamed of, comfortable in the presence of anyone, you do not worry about what you are waring, but once you feel shame everything about you becomes shameful.-Adam was naked before the fall and after. Why was he only ashamed and afraid after he ate of the fruit because he made a covering for his nakedness.
You said: “Having the ability to not sin…”, so can we have that “ability” while here on earth and what would provide that ability?
Is having the ability to not sin, result in not sinning or is there more to it?
Jesus and us derive at least some of our temptation from Satan, so what is the difference?
Wow, this brings up the whole: Earthly reign, which I like many others do not agree with.
There are no equivalent “English words” for every Greek word and the Greek has gender to help you which is not translated into the English. There are good reasons for the Greek scholars to not put one literal mean to each Greek word, because one Greek word can have many English words translations and have the need to add English words or you cannot understand what was said.
You ask: “Jesus had a sin nature or the ability to sin where did this come from”, how about the same place Adam and Eve’s ability to sin came from (Adam was begotten by God, but where do you find Jesus begotten by anyone?)
Not sinning does not mean you are incapable of sinning.
God does not and will not sin, but God does have free will to do what can be done.
After death we become: “Like the Angels”, but some of the angels sinned, so why can’t we have the ability to son and yet be like the angels who did not sin?
Well go start your own thread about thatI am asking for your take on man's objective while on earth?
He was telling them to make disciples of His regenerated chosen. You cant make disciples of the lost spiritually dead.Cool. Then when Jesus said "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations" He was just giving them a meaningless task because He'd already done all of that. What a weird view of scripture.
If you really interpreted scripture with scripture then you would know that John 12:32 means literally "all people" just like it says. Why wouldn't Jesus draw all people to Himself when you consider that God graciously offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11), that God commands all people everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30), that God wants all people to be saved (1 Timothy 2:3-6) and that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world (John 3:16, 1 John 2:1-2)? Why would you think that Jesus would not draw the people to Himself that He died to give the opportunity of eternal life, which is all people in the whole world? Some who are drawn to Him then decide not to take the next step by repenting of their sins and putting their faith in Him like the Jews Stephen rebuked who were resisting the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51).He is speaking of His Sheep,I interpret scripture with scripture,
His sheep are the ones who willingly choose to accept what He did for everyone. But, He made it so that all people would have the opportunity to be among His sheep. That's what you don't get.so who did Jesus say He was dying for in Jn 10 Thats who He is dying for in Jn 12
God loves everyone in the whole world. Do you deny that? John 3:16 says that whoever in the world believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life. And those in the world who do not believe in Him are condemned because the light went out to them but they chose to remain in darkness instead (John 3:19). Jesus sacrificed Himself for the sins of all people in the whole world (1 John 2:1-2), but it's only those who choose to believe in Him that will not perish and have eternal life.But it doesn't just say "whoever" or "whosoever". It says "whoever believes in Him."
Right. The reality is that it's whosoever chooses to believe in Him. That's the only way to make sense of John 3:16 since God loves everyone in the world and, therefore, it would contradict His character if He chose some to have eternal life while not even giving anyone else any opportunity to have eternal life.Yup. But it doesn't say whosoever was chosen to believe in Him.
When a Calvinist says they "interpret Scripture with Scripture" what they mean is they begin with the proof texts that they use to support their doctrine, and then force every other text to fit with their understanding of those proof texts. It sounds good, but it's a poor approach to exegesis because it requires imposing a prior understanding on any and all texts that contradict their doctrinal stance.If you really interpreted scripture with scripture then you would know that John 12:32 means literally "all people" just like it says. Why wouldn't Jesus draw all people to Himself when you consider that God graciously offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11), that God commands all people everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30), that God wants all people to be saved (1 Timothy 2:3-6) and that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world (John 3:16, 1 John 2:1-2)? Why would you think that Jesus would not draw the people to Himself that He died to give the opportunity of eternal life, which is all people in the whole world? Some who are drawn to Him then decide not to take the next step by repenting of their sins and putting their faith in Him like the Jews Stephen rebuked who were resisting the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51).
His sheep are the ones who willingly choose to accept what He did for everyone. But, He made it so that all people would have the opportunity to be among His sheep. That's what you don't get.
He even died for the false teachers and prophets that Peter wrote about in the following verse, but they denied Him. He paid the price for their sins, but they were not willing to accept what He did for them. Obviously, those who reject Him and His sacrifice won't be His sheep and won't have their sins forgiven by His blood, but that doesn't mean He didn't die to give them that opportunity.
2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.