The Impeccability of Our Lord Jesus Christ

[PaulThomson]

I wrote:
One could argue from scripture that according to the apostle John, all children of God are impeccable.
1 John 2:9 Whoever has been born of God does not commit sin; for His seed remains in him and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
And yet we are tempted and we can yield to that temptation.

Context always clarifies. The first verse of that chapter states...

1 John 2:1
“My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:”

John is telling us that we must try to not sin. It is to be our goal. It is like a father telling his son to be a good boy. The father knows that this "impeccable perfection" is not a possibility. We must maintain the "want to".

John does not say "whoever has been born of God tries not to sin". He says "whoever has been born of God does not sin".

We know we have a new man centred on our born of God spirit in which God dwells, that we need to renew our mind to agree with, so that we can bring every thought captive to our spirit and every action in obedience to it. That new man is impeccable: s/he cannot sin. We also have an old man, born of blood and centred on our flesh that is at enmity with God and cannot please God, that we need to keep putting to death by the Spirit. S/he can sin.

 

[PaulThomson]

Jesus was tempted but did not sin. Perhaps you misunderstand the meaning of the word liable. One cannot be liable for sin if one has not sinned.

By that argument, before Adam took the fruit from Eve, he was not liable to sin.

 

[oyster67]

John does not say "whoever has been born of God tries not to sin". He says "whoever has been born of God does not sin".

I showed you where and how the context clarifies this, but if you would choose to ignore context, that is your prerogative. I qouted John's opening verse:

oyster67 said:
Context always clarifies. The first verse of that chapter states...

1 John 2:1
“My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:”

John is telling us that we must try to not sin. It is to be our goal. It is like a father telling his son to be a good boy. The father knows that this "impeccable perfection" is not a possibility. We must maintain the "want to".

 

[oyster67]

By that argument, before Adam took the fruit from Eve, he was not liable to sin.

Yes. Adam was not responsible for sin before he took the fruit.

Liable = Responsible For.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Liable = Responsible For.

Or "likely to do or to be something". Depends on the context. But this is what Paul Thomson had in mind. But Paul is simply speculating about Adam.

 

[PaulThomson]

I showed you where and how the context clarifies this, but if you would choose to ignore context, that is your prerogative. I qouted John's opening verse:

oyster67 said:
Context always clarifies. The first verse of that chapter states...

1 John 2:1
“My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:”

John is telling us that we must try to not sin. It is to be our goal. It is like a father telling his son to be a good boy. The father knows that this "impeccable perfection" is not a possibility. We must maintain the "want to".

The doctrines of the new man in Christ who is renewing his mind and the old man who needs to be crucified daily and thinks like the pre-regenerate man explains John better than your insertion of "trying not to sin" into the equation. John is writing to empower the saints to "sin not" by yielding to the Spirit. But they have an old man ruled by the flesh who may gain the ascendency and seduce the person into unbelieving transgressions of the law of liberty. In that case, the atonement immediately restores such a person to fellowship with God.

 

[PaulThomson]

Or "likely to do or to be something". Depends on the context. But this is what Paul Thomson had in mind. But Paul is simply speculating about Adam.

"

1
a
: obligated according to law or equity (see EQUITY sense 3) : RESPONSIBLE
Both owners are liable for the debts incurred by the business.

b
: subject to appropriation or attachment
All his property is liable to pay his debts.


2
a
: being in a position to incur

—used with to
liable to a fine
b
: exposed or subject to some usually adverse contingency or action
Watch out or you're liable to fall."

I was thinking in terms of 2b. You cannot determine that Jesus was not exposed to falling through sin by noting that He did not ever fall through sin. It could be that He was inapable, or it could be tht he resisted temptations successfully.
Nor can you determine that Adam was exposed to falling through sin before he was tempted and fell through sin. He could have been incapable of falling before satan presented a temptation in a convincing form, or he could have been already resisting temptations to eat from the tree before satan's temptation came in it's convincing form.

We cannot categorically determine innate impeccability or peccability at time zero from later outward behaviour.

 

[oyster67]

the atonement immediately restores such a person to fellowship with God.

The Atonement is not a Roman Catholic indulgence.