Did Jesus Ever Fall in Love With Anyone?

[AllForJesus]

I think that if He were to have a thing for a girl, nothing would have happened at all simply because He had better things to do than engage in courtship. In other words, He'd have mentally slapped himself, said "As nice as this is, I'm too busy doing God's work", and moved on.

At least, that's my opinion.

that's the closet thing to reality i guess.

 

[bliz]

I think that if He were to have a thing for a girl, nothing would have happened at all simply because He had better things to do than engage in courtship. In other words, He'd have mentally slapped himself, said "As nice as this is, I'm too busy doing God's work", and moved on.

At least, that's my opinion.

Once he entered public ministry at age 32 it seems highly unlikely that Jesus would have had time or energy for a personal relationship. But what about up until age 32? What about when he was 15?

 

[Caleb89]

Well, (she replied, speaking in a normal tone of voice) I was hoping that when you read your words restated that you would rethink your position or explain it more fullly.

Your Jesus was incapable of fallling in love, something akin to sinning, in your book. So, your Jesus was not fully human, a position that seems to be in conflict with Scripture. It also is a negetive view of romantic love.

Sorry for my apparent "non-normal-toned voice."

Perhaps I should have put it this way:

While on Earth, Jesus Christ was 100% human in His nature. However, he was 100% divine in His essence. There is a difference.

Our human nature is what makes us vulnerable to physical pain and illness. Our human essence is what makes us vulnerable to spiritual pain and illness.

Human beings are 100% human in their nature and 100% human in their essence.

This means that we are vulnerable to physical illness & to spiritual illness (a.k.a.- SIN).

Jesus was vulnerable to physical illness but he was NOT vulnerable to spiritual illness (a.k.a.-SIN).

I think that we all would agree that Jesus Christ was the PERFECT, SINLESS sacfrificial Lamb.

Anyone who is vulnerable to SIN is going to SIN!!! So, how then COULD Jesus be vunerable to SIN???

The Answer: HE WASN'T!

To say that Jesus Christ was not 100% human by nature AND 100% divine in essence is to say that He was not worthy to die on the croos for our sins, because He was not perfect.

 

[bliz]

Sorry, I must disagree.

Your distinctio between nature and essence seems quite blurry to me...

We know that Jesus was tempted in every way. If Jesus was unable to sin, that would have been no temptation at all. It's not amazing that Jesus did not sin if He could not have sinned.

But, last time I checked, falling in love or having a crush or having feelings for someone are not sinful things so I'm not sure why it is discussed here.

 

[4Christ2]

Jesus could have chosen to fall in love and have a romantic interest. But if you truly know his purpose and the fulfillment of prophesy...He came to be about His Father's business. His priority was God's will. I think we tend to try and bring God/Jesus/Holy Spirit to where we are as humans in order to grasp just how vast and everlasting they are. IMO, being in a romantic relationship with anyone would have detoured Him from His purpose and His Father's will. Someone in a romantic relationship would be interested more in pleasing their significant other. Whereas someone not...would be more interested in the things of God (did Paul not say?)

 

[Blank123]

if He fell in love with a gril would it be fair for the other girls?
i mean He would have treated her diffrently no?

if he did have romantic feelings for one or more girls what would make you think he would act upon those and persue a relationship?

 

[Fortuna]

Did Jesus fall in love?
What i mean is not if He fall in the lustful sin (Of course not! i would never think of that!) but what i mean is if He was full human exept sin He would fall in love no? and If He fall in love does it mean that He's not just and that He loved some ppl more than other?
Please don't turn that to a debate if Jesus sinned or not because I'm sure He did not and I'm sure that even if He fall in love , He did not go one second in that direction.
Thank you
AFJ

Jesus felt anger. Remember how he trashed the Jewish temple because of the money changers and merchants. He suffered on the cross. He showed compassion to the crippled and sick. Why then would he not love a woman as a man does, maybe? He was here as man to understand and know our sufferings and our joys. I believe his emotions included all of them. The difference is, that he was Jesus and also he knew how to rise above earthly temptations and I believe that because he knew what his mission on earth was. I believe he saw all people as God his father's children as well.

Blessings, Fortuna

 

[KJVisTruth]

I dont believe He did. Before He became a man, He loved us like a Father, and to have that love changed when He became flesh seems out of character, and I think, even a little twisted. He was God in the flesh, therefore God is ever unchanging, even in His love.

 

[Caleb89]

Sorry, I must disagree.

Your distinctio between nature and essence seems quite blurry to me...

We know that Jesus was tempted in every way. If Jesus was unable to sin, that would have been no temptation at all. It's not amazing that Jesus did not sin if He could not have sinned.

But, last time I checked, falling in love or having a crush or having feelings for someone are not sinful things so I'm not sure why it is discussed here.

Well, why it's blurry to you confuses me. All of us have a nature and essence. And why would it not be miraculous that Jesus was incapable of Sin? Just because He was incapable of Sin doesn't mean He wasn't subjected to it! The fact that He was incapable of Sin is what makes Him the Perfect Lamb of God!

 

[bliz]

Well, why it's blurry to you confuses me. All of us have a nature and essence. And why would it not be miraculous that Jesus was incapable of Sin? Just because He was incapable of Sin doesn't mean He wasn't subjected to it! The fact that He was incapable of Sin is what makes Him the Perfect Lamb of God!

Oh, well, now that you repeat the same words over again, without any further explaination, it'sperfectly clear!

 

[ebia]

Well, why it's blurry to you confuses me. All of us have a nature and essence. And why would it not be miraculous that Jesus was incapable of Sin? Just because He was incapable of Sin doesn't mean He wasn't subjected to it! The fact that He was incapable of Sin is what makes Him the Perfect Lamb of God!

The fact that He did not Sin is what makes Him the Perfect Lamb of God!

What on earth does "incapable of sin but subject to it" mean?

 

[Adammi]

Sorry for my apparent "non-normal-toned voice."

Perhaps I should have put it this way:

While on Earth, Jesus Christ was 100% human in His nature. However, he was 100% divine in His essence. There is a difference.

Our human nature is what makes us vulnerable to physical pain and illness. Our human essence is what makes us vulnerable to spiritual pain and illness.

Human beings are 100% human in their nature and 100% human in their essence.

This means that we are vulnerable to physical illness & to spiritual illness (a.k.a.- SIN).

Jesus was vulnerable to physical illness but he was NOT vulnerable to spiritual illness (a.k.a.-SIN).

I think that we all would agree that Jesus Christ was the PERFECT, SINLESS sacfrificial Lamb.

Anyone who is vulnerable to SIN is going to SIN!!! So, how then COULD Jesus be vunerable to SIN???

The Answer: HE WASN'T!

To say that Jesus Christ was not 100% human by nature AND 100% divine in essence is to say that He was not worthy to die on the croos for our sins, because He was not perfect.

Jesus was 100% man in every way possible, yet he did not sin. That is the miracle of it.

Scripture tells us that Christ was "tempted in every manner, just as us."

Jesus could have sinned. He was a man in every sense of the word.

Had Jesus not been capable of sin, then what kind of miralce would it have been that he didn't?

 

[Adammi]

The fact that He was incapable of Sin is what makes Him the Perfect Lamb of God!

Actually it would be the other way around.
Christ's ablitity to sin, yet complete abstinance from it is what makes him our perfect sacrifice.
What use is an incarnated deity if he isn't incarnate?

If Jesus was not able to sin then the greatest miracle of all means nothing.

God became man. God took humanity into Himself.
He became a human, not some Herculean demi-god, half-god and half-man.

While on Earth, Jesus Christ was 100% human in His nature. However, he was 100% divine in His essence.

It is necessary for eternal salvation that one also faithfully believe that our Lord Jesus Christ became flesh.
For this is the true faith that we believe and confess: That our Lord Jesus Christ, God's Son, is both God and man.
He is God, begotten before all worlds from the being of the Father, and he is man, born in the world from the being of his mother --
existing fully as God, and fully as man with a rational soul and a human body;
equal to the Father in divinity, subordinate to the Father in humanity.
Although he is God and man, he is not divided, but is one Christ.
He is united because God has taken humanity into himself; he does not transform deity into humanity.
He is completely one in the unity of his person, without confusing his natures.
For as the rational soul and body are one person, so the one Christ is God and man.

But this is another discussion for another thread.
Back to your scheduled viewing of "Did Jesus fall in love?"

 

[Caleb89]

Everyone seems to be not understanding the fact that every has a nature and an essence. To deny this is to say that we are only flesh and have no spirit. Which would completely destroy the entire Christian religion.



Brother Pluto, MANY theologians would disagree with your above statement that Jesus was "not some God/Man." Including the Rev. Dr. Billy Graham, whom, like myself, seems to be a role model to you. At least your post in my "Billy Graham Tribute" thread seem to be a strong indication of this.


Was Jesus, while He was here on earth, not God in the flesh???

Yes, he was. Most every Christian would agree with this.

So, if He was God in the flesh, how then would He be vulnerable to sin???

Are you saying that GOD is vulnerable to sin???

Are you saying that He is no better than Adam and Eve, who He created, who were vulnerable to sin and then DID???



ALL of you should read, "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" by Bruce Ware.

 

[Adammi]

Brother Pluto, MANY theologians would disagree with your above statement that Jesus was "not some God/Man." Including the Rev. Dr. Billy Graham, whom, like myself, seems to be a role model to you. At least your post in my "Billy Graham Tribute" thread seem to be a strong indication of this.

I did not say that he wasn't the God/Man, because he is.

Was Jesus, while He was here on earth, not God in the flesh???

Yes, he was. Most every Christian would agree with this.

Yes, he was God in the flesh and every Christian believes this. To say that he was not is outside of the confines of the Christian faith.

So, if He was God in the flesh, how then would He be vulnerable to sin???

[bible]Hebrews 4:15[/bible]
Or as the Young Literal Translation says, "for we have not a chief priest unable to sympathise with our infirmities, but [one] tempted in all things in like manner -- apart from sin;"

Note how the YLT says, "in like manner." or as the KJV says, "like as we".
According to scripture, he endured temptation with the same capacities as us. The same vulnerability as Adam. This is why scripture calls Christ "the Second Adam".

Are you saying that He is no better than Adam and Eve, who He created, who were vulnerable to sin and then DID???

Ah ha. I think you are onto something. That is the primary miracle of the Christian religion. God became man. He lowered himself to the level of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve.
God the Son became subordinate to the Father in his humanity.

 

[Blank123]

So, if He was God in the flesh, how then would He be vulnerable to sin???

do you have a verse that says Christ was unable to sin? i don't want you to misunderstand my question - i am in no way suggesting that Christ sinned - we know by Scripture that He didn't. but i'd like to see how you reached the conclusion you seem to have that He was unable to sin.

 

[bliz]

If Jesus was unable to sin, there would be no temptation to sin.

 

[Adammi]

He did sin, but i'd like to see how you reached the conclusion you seem to have that He was unable to sin.

I know that you meant to say "He did not sin." but you may want to edit that just in case someone doesn't realize what you were saying.

 

[Adammi]

While on Earth, Jesus Christ was 100% human in His nature. However, he was 100% divine in His essence. There is a difference.

This statement has got me wondering a lot of things.

It sounds very monophysitist
Monophysitism is the christological position that Christ has only one nature, as opposed to the Chalcedonian position which holds that Christ has two natures, one divine and one human.
Monophysitism was condemned by the Council of Chalcedon in a.d. 451.

The orthodox position is that Christ has two natures. He is 100% human in every way possible, including his nature. He is 100% divine in every way possible, including his nature.
He has two natures. Human and Divine.

 

[Blank123]

I know that you meant to say "He did not sin." but you may want to edit that just in case someone doesn't realize what you were saying.

actually that was what i meant to say - the part you quoted was only part of the sentence. perhaps that wasn't clear though by the way i wrote it out. I've edited it so hopefully its a little clearer now