Did Jesus Have The Human Sinful Nature?

[DevotiontoBible]

Not even close.


This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth.
1 John 5:6

Came by by water described natural child birth.

Came by Water and blood described supernatural virgin child birth.

“Came” refers to; came into the world.


Let’s go to John 3, where John records Jesus using this phrase.


5 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:5-6


Born of Water = Natural child birth -
That which is born of the flesh

Born of the Spirit = Spiritual Birth.
that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.



JPT

I always have Bible to lead me but you don't. I provided a Bible quote on that but you can't.

 

[CS1]

I always have Bible to lead me but you don't. I provided a Bible quote on that but you can't.

no you have not .

 

[CS1]

OK.. But you guys have to resolve this somehow:

James 1:
13) Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

Heb 4:
15) For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

In his humanity, Jesus was tempted. If there was no chance for failure, then he was not actually tempted.

that is easy the word tempted has two means depending on the Greek word used One is test the other is drawn by the lust in the heart of man .

Jesu had no lust in HIS heart to be drawn away with as man does yet the devil still tested HIM or tempted HIM.

 

[justpassinthrough]

I always have Bible to lead me but you don't. I provided a Bible quote on that but you can't.

LOL.

I just quoted two scriptures and you quoted none.


You Refered to some bible commentary.


Aparantly you don’t understand the phrase for flesh gives birth to flesh is a reference to natural child birth.


This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth.
1 John 5:6

Came by by water described natural child birth.

Came by Water and blood described supernatural virgin child birth.

“Came” refers to; came into the world.


Let’s go to John 3, where John records Jesus using this phrase.


5 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:5-6


Born of Water = Natural child birth -
That which is born of the flesh

Born of the Spirit = Spiritual Birth.
that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.



JPT

 

[DevotiontoBible]

no you have not .

I most certain did. I even bolded what pertained to his question to me. You can see it in his quote of my quote. Why do you keep accusing me of not quoting Bible verses? Where did you learn to discuss by using simple denial as a major tool?

 

[DevotiontoBible]

LOL.

I just quoted two scriptures and you quoted none.


You Refered to some bible commentary.


Aparantly you don’t understand the phrase for flesh gives birth to flesh is a reference to natural child birth.


This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth.
1 John 5:6

Came by by water described natural child birth.

Came by Water and blood described supernatural virgin child birth.

“Came” refers to; came into the world.


Let’s go to John 3, where John records Jesus using this phrase.


5 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:5-6


Born of Water = Natural child birth -
That which is born of the flesh

Born of the Spirit = Spiritual Birth.
that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.



JPT

I quoted a Bible translation.

 

[DevotiontoBible]

Ok Philosophy ? hmmm definition : the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline.

well it is funny you lay the claim of philosophy on me yet you were shown your error of Hebrews 2:17-18 in the NLT . Im posted for you the context from chapter 1 of that very same book and I used the NLT. you built a false narrative from only TWO verses in one chapter . And have the audacity to tell me about the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge , reality, and existence when considering academic disciplines?

You clearly forgot Hebrews chapter 1 which is the introduction to chapter two contextually . SO your understand of Hebrews 2:17-18 is incomplete .

I can not find any post to me of you correcting any error.

 

[CS1]

I most certain did. I even bolded what pertained to his question to me. You can see it in his quote of my quote. Why do you keep accusing me of not quoting Bible verses? Where did you learn to discuss by using simple denial as a major tool?

nope you have not and your hebrews 2:17-18 is not in context the way you are using it. I do not know what commentary you are using but it is not pick the first word you see. it has to meet the authorial intent in what is known as the circle of context. the proper exegesis is to : achieve authorial intent meaning: what did the author say , who did he say it to, what was the time frame he said it in , and how do I apply it today . That is only answered when 1. you have looked above and below Hebrews 2:1718 , in the paragraph, chapter , book, and the rest of the Bible. if you look at Hebrews 2:17-18 30 verses books and chapters speak directly against your assertion then. Your context is wrong.

That is what you did. Jesus does to have a sinful nature . And elitcing of a few verses by manipulation of the word to change the context is error.
Please send me a thank you letter no money for basic introduction to Biblical hermeneutics . Thank you PO Box read you bible in context to Authorial intent .

 

[Nehemiah6]

I think you’re missing the point. Jesus, in his humanity, was actually tempted , and could have sinned.

Give it up Shrume. There should come a point when people abandon lies for the truth. That's what real Christianity is all about.

 

[shrume]

that is easy the word tempted has two means depending on the Greek word used One is test the other is drawn by the lust in the heart of man .

The Greek words in James 1:13 and Heb 4:15 are from the same word, peirazo {pi-rad'-zo}

Jesu had no lust in HIS heart to be drawn away with as man does yet the devil still tested HIM or tempted HIM.

Jesus did not sin. But he could have. If it was impossible for him to sin, then he was not tempted, and the temptations were a sham.

 

[shrume]

Give it up Shrume. There should come a point when people abandon lies for the truth. That's what real Christianity is all about.

I agree. But people seem stuck. If people prefer clinging to their traditions over the truth, there's not much anyone can do about it.

 

[CS1]

I can not find any post to me of you correcting any error.

Post 754 in context to Hebrews 2:17-18 in the NLT you can look there

 

[CS1]

The Greek words in James 1:13 and Heb 4:15 are from the same word, peirazo {pi-rad'-zo}


Jesus did not sin. But he could have. If it was impossible for him to sin, then he was not tempted, and the temptations were a sham.

you say HE could have the word of god sys God cannot sin nor is God a liar like man. If you want to separate Jesus from the Devine nature HE has which is holy and without sin and say God can sin you can say that; the Bible does not teach that. If you want to interject something the bible does not teach go ahead .


You keep saying "If it was impossible for him to sin, then he was not tempted,"
you equate temptation with sin after you said you agree that being tempted is not sin . That is an oxymoron . How can something that is not sin be sin if the one did not do it? BUT you keep saying HE could have . In the context of sovereignty you might be able to say that IF you change the context of Gods Devine nature of "Sovereignty " = Supreme power or authority Which Jesus has .
So Jesus who is Supreme power & authority could sin even IF HE said HE would not SIN, so why stop there with this error?

Jesus could have lied but choose not to. Or committed adultery but choose not to. That is Biblical error .
The Lord Jesus Christ is Supreme OVER sin. he defeated it .

 

[shrume]

you say HE could have the word of god sys God cannot sin nor is God a liar like man. If you want to separate Jesus from the Devine nature HE has which is holy and without sin and say God can sin you can say that; the Bible does not teach that. If you want to interject something the bible does not teach go ahead .

I do not say God can sin, so that's a strawman. I do say that Jesus in his humanity could have sinned.

You keep saying "If it was impossible for him to sin, then he was not tempted,"

Yes.

you equate temptation with sin

No, I do not.

after you said you agree that being tempted is not sin . That is an oxymoron .

No it isn't. Being tempted is not sin. On that we do agree.

How can something that is not sin be sin if the one did not do it?

If the one did not do it, he did not sin.

BUT you keep saying HE could have . In the context of sovereignty you might be able to say that IF you change the context of Gods Devine nature of "Sovereignty " = Supreme power or authority Which Jesus has .
So Jesus who is Supreme power & authority could sin even IF HE said HE would not SIN, so why stop there with this error?

Jesus could have lied but choose not to. Or committed adultery but choose not to.

That's right.

That is Biblical error .

It's the truth.

The Lord Jesus Christ is Supreme OVER sin. he defeated it .

Yes, in his humanity, Jesus defeated sin by not sinning. If he would have sinned, he would not have defeated sin. If he was not truly tested, he didn't truly defeat anything.

 

[DevotiontoBible]

you do have to take what was said prior to Heb 2:17-18 if you do not then it is confusing

So if you read hebrews chapter 1
this is said first about Jesus so we should I think Build on this from Chapter 1 moving through the book of Hebrews

NLT:

:1
Long ago God spoke many times and in many ways to our ancestors through the prophets.

:2
And now in these final days, he has spoken to us through his Son. G
:3

The Son radiates God’s own glory and expresses the very character of God, he sustains everything by the mighty power of his command. When he had cleansed us from our sins, he sat down in the place of honor at the right hand of the majestic God in heaven.

:4
This shows that the Son is far greater than the angels, just as the name God gave him is greater than their names.
:5
For God never said to any angel what he said to Jesus:
“You are my Son.
Today I have become your Father.[fn]”God also said,
“I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son.”[fn]

:6
And when he brought his supreme[fn] Son into the world, God said,[fn]
“Let all of God’s angels worship him.”[fn]

Please read on to Heb 21-18
From chapter one

Jesus is very much seen as God Here & our High Priest which has to be without sin.

Hews 1 says Jesus has or is the following :

God promised everything to the Son as an inheritance, and through the Son he created the universe.

Jesus in Creation= had to be without sin

The Son radiates God’s own glory and expresses the very character of God, = had to be without SIN to have the VERY Character of God.

This shows that the Son is far greater than the angels, just as the name God gave him is greater than their names.

the name is "authority " God gave HIM greater= could not be done if HE had sin
nd on and on it goes.

SO what is it in Heb 2:17-18 ?

If we look at verse 1 of chapter two It tells us to do what?

:1 So we must listen very carefully to the truth we have heard, or we may drift away from it.
this is in context to what has already be said bout Jesus in chapter 1
Jesus when HE said in verse 11

So now Jesus and the ones he makes holy have the same Father. That is why Jesus is not ashamed to call them his brothers and sisters.[fn]
who are the brothers and sisters it is speaking about in 17 -18?

The Jews .

Nothing you provide says Jesus can't have had a body with our fallen human sinful nature just because He is God. That is your own philosophy but nothing found in the context of Hebrews.

 

[CS1]

This topic is important because we need to know and understand the Supremacy of Christ over SIN. To interject human reasoning and say " Jesus could have sinned but choose to obey God instead , " is biblical error. This is why many who speak about the Godhead should not do so; because they and we have limited understanding of the Divine Nature of God. Where the Bible is silent we should be too.
We do not use human reasoning we use scripture to interpret scripture . This is done first by having a relationship with Christ as your Lord and savior .

The Word of God says Jesus is without SIN. what does "without" mean? The ability to do, the absence of , not there and incapable of doing.
In the word of God where we see

without sin would be a very good study :

Jesus is speaking in John 8:7

" He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her"
the word here is You who are sinless

Hebrews 4:15
"For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
the word without sin is :
"without any sin
Jesus did not have the ability to Mis the mark as man does. Why ? because HE is God .

 

[CS1]

I do not say God can sin, so that's a strawman. I do say that Jesus in his humanity could have sinned.


Yes.


No, I do not.


No it isn't. Being tempted is not sin. On that we do agree.


If the one did not do it, he did not sin.


That's right.

It's the truth.


Yes, in his humanity, Jesus defeated sin by not sinning. If he would have sinned, he would not have defeated sin. If he was not truly tested, he didn't truly defeat anything.

it is not a straw man if you say Jesus could have sinned. same same . The Bible tells us Jesus could not sin HE would not disobey HIS Father . the best example I can think of and this too maybe not strong enough is Joseph running from pother's wife. IF HE would have was not even a possibility .

 

[CS1]

Nothing you provide says Jesus can't have had a body with our fallen human sinful nature just because He is God. That is your own philosophy but nothing found in the context of Hebrews.

No that is Biblical sound teaching and a fundamental truth.

 

[DevotiontoBible]

This topic is important because we need to know and understand the Supremacy of Christ over SIN. To interject human reasoning and say " Jesus could have sinned but choose to obey God instead , " is biblical error. This is why many who speak about the Godhead should not do so; because they and we have limited understanding of the Divine Nature of God. Where the Bible is silent we should be too.
We do not use human reasoning we use scripture to interpret scripture . This is done first by having a relationship with Christ as your Lord and savior .

The Word of God says Jesus is without SIN. what does "without" mean? The ability to do, the absence of , not there and incapable of doing.
In the word of God where we see

without sin would be a very good study :

Jesus is speaking in John 8:7

" He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her"
the word here is You who are sinless

Hebrews 4:15
"For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
the word without sin is :
"without any sin
Jesus did not have the ability to Mis the mark as man does. Why ? because HE is God .

But what you won't accept is that he was also very man OF very man. Your Jesus faced easier trials than you since he was not like you in every way but was essentially different kind of human without the ability to feel what we do trying not to give into temptation.

 

[DevotiontoBible]

No that is Biblical sound teaching and a fundamental truth.

But you said it was a teaching found in Hebrews 1-2, it isn't.