It Was Impossible for Jesus to Sin

[Alithis]

I was reading through Berkhof this evening and came upon this:

"We ascribe to Christ not only natural, but also moral, integrity or moral perfection, that is sinlessness. This means not merely that Christ could avoid sinning, and did actually avoid it, but also that it was impossible for Him to sin because of the essential bond between the human and the divine natures."

I probably did not adequately grasp this before. Because Jesus is God, it was impossible for Him to sin. He did not struggle to be righteous like you and I do. It was the very nature of Christ to be righteous.

so your saying contrary to scripture that he was not the second adam and he was not flesh and blood in like manner of his brethren and did not get tempted in every fashion that we are tempted and did not obey the father out of love for the father but was a automated robot ... ?

 

[com7fy8]

If that is true (it's not) then being the only man to live a sinless life is meaningless and not an accomplishment in the slightest yet the writers of the NT give great praise to such an accomplishment because it is impossible for regular people. This means he could have sinned but chose not to which is self control on a Godly level.

But doesn't this which you are saying deny that Jesus is God the Son? I am not dictating what you have to believe, but do you believe in the Trinity meaning three Persons of God?

I offer that if God came as Jesus and did not sin because He can not sin, this does mean something.

It means God even in human form can easily keep from doing evil (James 3:13). And it means that Jesus living and growing in us as our new inner Person (Galatians 4:19) is easily, almightily, able to keep us from sinning and in other ways being under the power of Satan (please feed on Acts 26:18). And Jesus shares this with us (Galatians 2:20) as much as each of us is "one spirit with Him." (in 1 Corinthians 6:17).

"You are of God, little children, and have overcome them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world." (1 John 4:4)

So, if Jesus can not sin because He is God, this means He is so much greater in us (Galatians 2:20, Galatians 4:19), than one who could sin would be greater.

So, it makes a big difference, also including that if Jesus can not sin, then Jesus growing in us makes us more and more easily able to stay clear of sinning and giving in to Satanic emotions and feelings and drives, and it becomes less and less of a struggle, since Christ's power is almighty with God's own immunity to sin-sick stuff; God in us shares His very own with us, including like this . . . more and more with His correction and how He has us growing in His grace which is almighty in our character. But if Jesus in us were a being inferior who is capable of sinning, this could mean we never stop struggling, but in His love with almighty immunity we can snuggle > 1 John 4:17

Also, it makes a major difference because it means God sent us a Person of His own self, and not some lesser being to reach us. And this is how love is > love will give the very best.

And I will offer . . . about how much it would mean for a human of one's own will to choose not to sin >

"it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure." (in Philippians 2:13)

So, from this, I trust, God is not interested in how we can get our own selves to make choices, because it would be in our human ability and spirit which would not be pleasing to God our Heavenly Father the way His own Son is so pleasing. So, He desires to work in our wills "for His good pleasure" how Jesus is pleasing to Him.

And this brings another item > a lesser being than God could not please our Father, on the cross, like Jesus has pleased Him as "a sweet-smelling aroma" (in Ephesians 5:2) > please see and consider Ephesians 5:2. A lesser being capable of sinning could not please our Father to reconcile with us and forgive us, like His own and divine Son has satisfied Him (1 John 2:2).

 

[PastorJoey]

I was reading through Berkhof this evening and came upon this:

"We ascribe to Christ not only natural, but also moral, integrity or moral perfection, that is sinlessness. This means not merely that Christ could avoid sinning, and did actually avoid it, but also that it was impossible for Him to sin because of the essential bond between the human and the divine natures."

I probably did not adequately grasp this before. Because Jesus is God, it was impossible for Him to sin. He did not struggle to be righteous like you and I do. It was the very nature of Christ to be righteous.

If it were impossible for Jesus to sin, He could not have been our example.

The bible teaches that God cannot be tempted with evil (James 1:13), but it also says that Jesus was tempted in in all points just as we are (Hebrews 4:15). So unless you understand the humanity of Jesus, the bible will appear to be in contradiction with itself.

Jesus was both %100 God and %100 man. He humbled Himself and became fully human (Philippians 2:8). He laid aside the privileges of His Deity and became fully human.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is BORN, unto us a son is GIVEN... His humanity was born, His Diety given.

 

[PastorJoey]

I was reading through Berkhof this evening and came upon this:

"We ascribe to Christ not only natural, but also moral, integrity or moral perfection, that is sinlessness. This means not merely that Christ could avoid sinning, and did actually avoid it, but also that it was impossible for Him to sin because of the essential bond between the human and the divine natures."

I probably did not adequately grasp this before. Because Jesus is God, it was impossible for Him to sin. He did not struggle to be righteous like you and I do. It was the very nature of Christ to be righteous.

If it were impossible for Jesus to sin, He could not have been our example.

The bible teaches that God cannot be tempted with evil (James 1:13), but it also says that Jesus was tempted in in all points just as we are (Hebrews 4:15). So unless you understand the humanity of Jesus, the bible will appear to be in contradiction with itself.

Jesus was both %100 God and %100 man. He humbled Himself and became fully human (Philippians 2:8). He laid aside the privileges of His Deity and became fully human.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is BORN, unto us a son is GIVEN... His humanity was born, His Diety given.

 

[PastorJoey]

I was reading through Berkhof this evening and came upon this:

"We ascribe to Christ not only natural, but also moral, integrity or moral perfection, that is sinlessness. This means not merely that Christ could avoid sinning, and did actually avoid it, but also that it was impossible for Him to sin because of the essential bond between the human and the divine natures."

I probably did not adequately grasp this before. Because Jesus is God, it was impossible for Him to sin. He did not struggle to be righteous like you and I do. It was the very nature of Christ to be righteous.

If it were impossible for Jesus to sin, He could not have been our example.

The bible teaches that God cannot be tempted with evil (James 1:13), but it also says that Jesus was tempted in in all points just as we are (Hebrews 4:15). So unless you understand the humanity of Jesus, the bible will appear to be in contradiction with itself.

Jesus was both %100 God and %100 man. He humbled Himself and became fully human (Philippians 2:8). He laid aside the privileges of His Deity and became fully human.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is BORN, unto us a son is GIVEN... His humanity was born, His Diety given.

 

[com7fy8]

If it were impossible for Jesus to sin, He could not have been our example.

But God is our example > Ephesians 5:1-2. So, His humanity includes how only Jesus could be truly human, by being humane in God's own love and being incapable of doing unloving things. He is love natured, fully. There is and never has been any nature in Jesus making Him capable of doing what is unloving and therefore sin. He is the same, "yesterday, today, and forever" > Hebrews 13:8.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

I was reading through Berkhof this evening and came upon this:

"We ascribe to Christ not only natural, but also moral, integrity or moral perfection, that is sinlessness. This means not merely that Christ could avoid sinning, and did actually avoid it, but also that it was impossible for Him to sin because of the essential bond between the human and the divine natures."

I probably did not adequately grasp this before. Because Jesus is God, it was impossible for Him to sin. He did not struggle to be righteous like you and I do. It was the very nature of Christ to be righteous.

So many problems with that line of thinking. Above all that though. To say God has no ability to choose to sin or to choose to be benevolent? That defies reason.

 

[RDKirk]

If it were impossible for Jesus to sin, He could not have been our example.

He would be the example that flesh =/= sin.

"I'm only human, born to make mistakes." No. Sin is not an inevitable result of being flesh. Being flesh does not even create a vulnerability to sin--that's what Jesus proved. Jesus--although flesh--was invulnerable to sin the way Superman is invulnerable to bullets.

The bible teaches that God cannot be tempted with evil (James 1:13), but it also says that Jesus was tempted in in all points just as we are (Hebrews 4:15). So unless you understand the humanity of Jesus, the bible will appear to be in contradiction with itself.

You, however, seem to be falling into the heresy of denying that Jesus is God and denying the holiness of Jesus.

Either that or you're not handling the term "tempt" correctly.

In Hebrews 4:15, the word is peirazo, which means "assayed" or "tested." The word means the action of determining whether something meets a standard, such as assaying a sample of gold to determine its purity.

Important to understand that being assayed does not denote impurity. It denotes that purity is being questioned. "Being tested" is not an indication of impurity, it's an indication that the purity is under dispute.

In James 1:13, the word applied to God is apeirastos, which means "cannot be tested." God's purity is beyond question, and un-assayable. James 1:13 says that not only is God's purity beyond being assayed, but that God Himself does not assay our purity.

The fact that Jesus--God Incarnate--was tested for sin by Satan does not imply in any way whatsoever that Jesus was actually vulnerable to sin, any more than a gangster shooting bullets at Superman implies that Superman is actually vulnerable to bullets.

Jesus did not struggle against sin. Like Superman facing a hail of bullets, Jesus did not flinch, He did not wince, He didn't get knocked down and have to struggle to get back to His feet. There was no fight to remain pure, Jesus was assayed by Satan and Satan found Him to be pure.

What Jesus proved--what makes Him our standard-- is that being made of flesh does not make us inherently vulnerable to sin. Jesus was of flesh, yet was invulnerable to sin. It's not the flesh itself that makes us vulnerable to sin.

 

[RDKirk]

To say God has no ability to choose to sin or to choose to be benevolent? That defies reason.

If you want to talk about reason, then don't merely assert it...show your proof.

Scripture states unequivocably: God is love. It does not say "God is mostly love." It does not say, "God is 99.44% love." It says that God is wholly love, without qualification.

So now, you assert that it is unreasonable to say that God is what scripture says He is. You are asserting that reason insists God contains the capacity of sin.

You need to prove that.

You need to display the argument, the premises leading to the conclusion that if sin is deviance from the will of God, then God is capable of deviating from His own will. You need to prove that God can commit an act against His own will.

 

[RDKirk]

Here is a visual representation of Jesus with His flesh:

 

[Doug Melven]

Which capabilities did He set aside? Enumerate them, please.

Because you're suggesting that He set aside some part of His holiness to be less holy than the Father.

He gave up Omnipresence, Omnipotence and Omniscience..The Father is all 3
Gave up the ability to never sleep. God does not sleep.
While He walked the earth He required food. God does not require food.
Jesus got tired. See John 4. God doesn't get tired.

Jesus did not give up holiness or hatred for sin.

 

[RDKirk]

He gave up Omnipresence, Omnipotence and Omniscience..The Father is all 3
Gave up the ability to never sleep. God does not sleep.
While He walked the earth He required food. God does not require food.
Jesus got tired. See John 4. God doesn't get tired.

Jesus did not give up holiness or hatred for sin.

So you agree that Jesus did not give up His holiness.

Which means Jesus proved that being of flesh, in itself, does not make a person vulnerable to sin.

However, you fell in accuracy by--probably inadvertently--denying that Jesus is God.

When you said, that Jesus is not omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient, but the Father is, that was correct.

However, you slipped in the next sentences when you denied that Jesus is God.

Jesus is God.

The Father does not sleep, or require food, never has, never will.

The Son, while normal flesh, required food and required sleep. But the Son is yet God, always was, always will be.

 

[Doug Melven]

However, you slipped in the next sentences when you denied that Jesus is God.

Jesus is God.

The Father does not sleep, or require food, never has, never will.

The Son, while normal flesh, required food and required sleep. But the Son is yet God, always was, always will be.

I did not deny Jesus deity.
That is just plain nitpicky to say I denied Jesus was God when I said "God does not sleep".
Maybe I should hve specified, the Father does not sleep, neither does the Holy Spirit. And Jesus doesn't sleep now either since His resurrection.

 

[AFrazier]

And Pelagius was a Bishop! Heresy!

I agree with a lot of Pelagius' doctrines. I think Augustine was grossly in error. But alas, Augustine had the authority to silence Pelagius, and Pelagius was eventually put to death. Since we know that Christians don't do that, I think it speaks boldly for who was acting within the will of God.

 

[PastorJoey]

He would be the example that flesh =/= sin.

"I'm only human, born to make mistakes." No. Sin is not an inevitable result of being flesh. Being flesh does not even create a vulnerability to sin--that's what Jesus proved. Jesus--although flesh--was invulnerable to sin the way Superman is invulnerable to bullets.



You, however, seem to be falling into the heresy of denying that Jesus is God and denying the holiness of Jesus.

Either that or you're not handling the term "tempt" correctly.

Jesus, the last Adam, was just as capable of yielding to sin/disobedience as was the first Adam. Jesus did not lay aside His Deity, but the privileges of His Deity and became fully human capable of being tempted in all points even as we. He overcame all temptation through the scriptures and prayer just as we need to.

I can't stand black licorice. You cannot tempt me with what is not at all appealing to me or something that I am not capable of succumbing to. The bible is crystal clear however, that Jesus was tempted in all points that we are. If He were "invulernable" to sin as you say, then it would be impossible for Satan to tempt Him. Remember God CANNOT be tempted with evil, yet Jesus WAS tempted in ALL points as we are.

In the wilderness, He afterwards was hunger. then came the tempter at the point of His weakness telling Him to command the stone to be turned to bread.

Jesus is God and He is holy, never having committed sin, but on earth was just as capable of committing it as any of us. This is what makes Him a faithful and merciful High Priest on our behalf. Because of His being tempted, He is able to be our "prompt succour".

Hebrews 2:17-18 17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. 18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Notice, Jesus SUFFERED being tempted. Doesn't seem like Superman and bullets to me.

 

[PastorJoey]

But God is our example > Ephesians 5:1-2. So, His humanity includes how only Jesus could be truly human, by being humane in God's own love and being incapable of doing unloving things. He is love natured, fully. There is and never has been any nature in Jesus making Him capable of doing what is unloving and therefore sin. He is the same, "yesterday, today, and forever" > Hebrews 13:8.

I think I see what you’re saying, but if Jesus functioned as God in the earth with His powers of Deity, He would not have been an example to us, because we never could do what only God can do. He could be a sign to us, but not an example we could follow.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

If you want to talk about reason, then don't merely assert it...show your proof.

Scripture states unequivocably: God is love. It does not say "God is mostly love." It does not say, "God is 99.44% love." It says that God is wholly love, without qualification.

So now, you assert that it is unreasonable to say that God is what scripture says He is. You are asserting that reason insists God contains the capacity of sin.

You need to prove that.

You need to display the argument, the premises leading to the conclusion that if sin is deviance from the will of God, then God is capable of deviating from His own will. You need to prove that God can commit an act against His own will.

Don’t have to prove the laws of nature and nature’s God. It’s the irrational, the mythical, the ludicrous that needs proven. Your statements are why people hate theology. Because it’s fake and confusing.
God is a moral agent. Moral agents are defined by an ability to choose the good and reject the evil. It’s what makes God so good and so worthy. He has the power to will and to do evil, But chooses good will, and expects those created in his own image to do the same.

“And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3:22‬ ‭KJV‬‬

 

[BobRyan]

I was reading through Berkhof this evening and came upon this:

"We ascribe to Christ not only natural, but also moral, integrity or moral perfection, that is sinlessness. This means not merely that Christ could avoid sinning, and did actually avoid it, but also that it was impossible for Him to sin because of the essential bond between the human and the divine natures."

I probably did not adequately grasp this before. Because Jesus is God, it was impossible for Him to sin. He did not struggle to be righteous like you and I do. It was the very nature of Christ to be righteous.

It is a false statement.

Romans 8
Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. 3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Christ's purpose before dying on the cross -- was to live life on Earth as a man and prove that God's Law could be kept - that God was just in making His requirements.

 

[Tree of Life]

Christ's purpose before dying on the cross -- was to live life on Earth as a man and prove that God's Law could be kept - that God was just in making His requirements.

Tragic.

God's Law cannot be kept by fallen man. Jesus was not a fallen man and could thus keep the Law.

 

[Tree of Life]

I think I see what you’re saying, but if Jesus functioned as God in the earth with His powers of Deity, He would not have been an example to us, because we never could do what only God can do. He could be a sign to us, but not an example we could follow.

We cannot live a sinless human life like Christ did because we are fallen. Christ in his sinlessness was not an example, but an oblation. Of course he exemplifies righteousness and we can and should imitate him. But we can never be perfect like Christ was perfect.

 

[Childofgodharrison]

I was reading through Berkhof this evening and came upon this:

"We ascribe to Christ not only natural, but also moral, integrity or moral perfection, that is sinlessness. This means not merely that Christ could avoid sinning, and did actually avoid it, but also that it was impossible for Him to sin because of the essential bond between the human and the divine natures."

I probably did not adequately grasp this before. Because Jesus is God, it was impossible for Him to sin. He did not struggle to be righteous like you and I do. It was the very nature of Christ to be righteous.

I use to believe that, but know I now that Jesus was able to sin, but he chose not too. He would have had to be able to be tempted in every way and over come it in order to die for the world. He was born with the same sin nature as Adam.