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.
Docetists would likewise claim it blasphemous for not agreeing with them.
Now in light of what you propose, that Jesus experience the physical feebleness we experience, but not the temptations we have, consider the verses I already mentioned, which apparently you overlooked.
Heb 4:15 "For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are— yet was without sin."
Heb 2:17,18 For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.
I don't normally engage in this kind of proof-texting, because it's removing statements from their context and using them in a way the author wouldn't have envisioned.At the same time, one can quote James 1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone.
The cars tendency to break down is not what causes the car to break down. If your operating the car with broken parts than it would have a tendency to break down but the broken parts is the cause.A sinful nature is a tendency. If you say that your car tends to break down, yet it never has broken down, then you would be contradicting yourself. I cannot say that Christ tends to sin if he never has. Therefore, he does not have a sinful nature. Otherwise, the term has no meaning.
Part of the reason people want Adam and Eve to not have a "sinful nature" or a nature like we have is because they feel that puts the blame on God for their sin and not giving them a better "nature"?I agree. There are those in this thread who believe Adam and Eve didn't have a sinful nature until they sinned. There's no scripture to support that. If you look at the description of Eve's temptation:
Gen 3:4-6 Then the serpent said to the woman, "You will not surely die. "For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate.
That seems right in line with the experience of temptation due to one's sinful nature and in line with 1John 2:16 For all that is in the world——the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life——is not of the Father but is of the world.
Rather I view the death that was due to Adam and Eve is referring to physical death, due to the fact that they were restricted from the tree of life which maintained their physical life.
Right I agree with you.I don't normally engage in this kind of proof-texting, because it's removing statements from their context and using them in a way the author wouldn't have envisioned.
But let me point out that Christ has two natures. Obviously God can't be tempted, but the human can. Mark 1:13 and parallels says that Jesus was. But you cite this yourself, so I'm not sure quite what your posting means.
It just means you're very susceptible to sin which did apply to Jesus when He put on human flesh but He never gave way to it. All sin comes through the flesh.The nature itself does not make you guilty of sin.
But you think he had a sinful nature which alone merits eternal hell.Yep I already said, and I quote, "Jesus didn't sin". You might want read more carefully before responding, else, "He who answers before listening— that is his folly and his shame." Pr 18:13
I've heard that theory. I find it bizarre and unscriptural for reasons I mentioned in this thread.But you think he had a sinful nature which alone merits eternal hell.
Why must we be born again? If we are not spiritually dead? And can do zero good with the right motive? “As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:” (Romans 3:10)I've heard that theory. I find it bizarre and unscriptural for reasons I mentioned in this thread.
The anti in "Antichrist" is a Greek word which typically means "in place of". And given the usage in scriptures speaking of the antiChrist, it's not one who rejects Christ, but rather replaces Christ. (Or one who rejects the real Christ by replacing him with their own version)
1John 4:3 and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.
...
If that was the case back then, not surprising to find it the case these days.
That's a different topic. The topic we had left off on was your proposition that though not sinning, not committing a crime one is reckoned guilty simply for being born with a sinful nature. What you're describing to me is injustice, that God is unjust, holding people accountable for things over which they have no control. But given that the scriptures indicate the God is just, such a theory is to be discarded.Why must we be born again? If we are not spiritually dead? And can do zero good with the right motive? “As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:” (Romans 3:10)
Righteousness = doing good things for the right reasons. Paul says nobody does this.
John writes of there being a plurality of antichristsWho was the Antichrist back then?
I've heard it to be Nero Caesar who was an evil emperor who torched Rome (in order to build a newer one) and blamed it on Christians.
https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/623-nero-caesar-and-the-christian-faith
https://www.thoughtco.com/who-is-the-antichrist-700629
And the new one could be even worse.
Realize your saying that people are born guilty, and not because of any action on their part, but rather because God created them guilty. You've just described injustice. The God of the scriptures is just, and therefore you're wrong.
Yes good.It just means you're very susceptible to sin which did apply to Jesus when He put on human flesh but He never gave way to it. All sin comes through the flesh.
James 1:14-16 (KJV)
14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
16 Do not err, my beloved brethren.
Paul,
Romans 7:18 (KJV) For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
Romans 7:23-25 (KJV)
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
Romans 8:1-2 (KJV)
1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
Romans 8:1-14 (KJV)
1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
Romans 9:8 (KJV) That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Romans 13:14 (KJV) But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.
provision - G4307 from <G4306> (pronoeo); forethought, i.e. provident care or supply :- providence, provision.
lusts - G1939 from <G1937> (epithumeo); a longing (especially for what is forbidden) :- concupiscence, desire, lust (after).
I don’t accept it either. But I think it’s worth explaining what’s going on.I've heard that theory. I find it bizarre and unscriptural for reasons I mentioned in this thread.
Actually your premise is wrong.You might say that people choose to sin and God allows thatand a just God would not, so your premise is wrong.
Actually your premise is wrong.
First you claim that a just God would not allow people to choose to sin. That doesn't logically follow. While God tolerates sin for a time, God is just and as such will hold people accountable or otherwise satisfy the demands of justice.
Secondly you're claiming that God is in fact unjust and you're attempting to defend the idea that he is unjust. I'm saying that if you believe God is practicing injustice then you're not talking about the God of scripture.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?