A question about Orthodox Christology that could turn into a debate.

[MariaRegina]

Also look at the bottom portion of that quote:

As the unique divine-human person, Jesus saves the world by teaching the absolute truth of God; by forgiving the evils of all men and the whole world; by suffering and dying in innocence, voluntarily and unjustly on the cross in order to be with all who suffer and die; by rising from the dead in a new and glorified form; by taking our humanity to God in order to make it divine forever; and by sending the Holy Spirit of God to men who believe so that they could teach and do the very things which Jesus Himself both taught and did...that they could, in a word, be sons of God in Him.

 

[Pythons]

One of the primary arguments for the reverse was that Jesus had to resist temptation ( as in His own temptation ) to sin. Say Jesus was on the mount teaching the crowds and some guy had a really attractive wife these peccability folks maintain that Christ would have had to resist His urge to sleep with the woman and would have had the same thoughts and sexual urges that any man would have.

It's like the peccability believers teach that it's not really sin unless you go through with doing the evil thoughts you may have and as long as you didn't sleep with the other mans wife you didn't sin even though you wanted to and had to resist your temptation to do so.

In the above way they maintain Christ was tempted but didn't sin which is a crafty way to hide their true teachings, what they mean was that Christ could have lost His Salvation and wanted to sin but by God's help was able to resist His evil urges to sin.

 

[Barky]

One of the primary arguments for the reverse was that Jesus had to resist temptation ( as in His own temptation ) to sin. Say Jesus was on the mount teaching the crowds and some guy had a really attractive wife these peccability folks maintain that Christ would have had to resist His urge to sleep with the woman and would have had the same thoughts and sexual urges that any man would have.

It's like the peccability believers teach that it's not really sin unless you go through with doing the evil thoughts you may have and as long as you didn't sleep with the other mans wife you didn't sin even though you wanted to and had to resist your temptation to do so.

In the above way they maintain Christ was tempted but didn't sin which is a crafty way to hide their true teachings, what they mean was that Christ could have lost His Salvation and wanted to sin but by God's help was able to resist His evil urges to sin.

The Lord state explicitly that thinking of a woman lustfully is committing adultery in your heart. Christ did not have these thoughts, otherwise he would have sinned. The Orthodox monastic tradition speaks of monks being able to see temptation approaching in the form of thoughts or actions, and being able to cut them off. The temptation of "you should sleep with her" and the actual thought thereof are two different things. though temptation itself is not a sin, giving into it in anyway, given thoughts or actions, is. Sin destroys us spiritually, eats us alive. Christ did not have those thoughts, though he certainly was tempted.

 

[MariaRegina]

Would that we could nip such temptations in the bud before they have a chance to blossom into sin and smell like those incredibly bad corpse flowers.

Lord have mercy.


http://waynesword.palomar.edu/ww0602.htm#corpse

 

[Mikeb85]

Sin = separation from God. Christ is God, so how could He separate from Himself?