Did Jesus Have The Human Sinful Nature?
- Thread starter DevotiontoBible
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Here is yet another article. As we may all have already surmised, this is a very important and likely oft asked question among the church.
Did Jesus Have a Sin Nature?
[\\]The short answer to your question is: No, Jesus did not inherit the sin nature from Adam. Jesus came to succeed where Adam failed. Jesus is called the "last Adam" (1 Corinthians 15:45
) and the "second man" (1 Corinthians 15:47
). Jesus testified that He came "to seek and to save that which was lost" (Luke 19:10
). What was lost in Adam was to be won in Jesus Christ. However, in order to do this, he only needed to start where Adam started, not where he ended.
Much of the purpose of the virgin birth was to allow Jesus to be fully human but without the Adamic nature. Joseph was "the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ" (Matthew 1:16
). Joseph was not the father of Jesus. Jesus did not receive the sinful nature of Joseph. However, He was born in the natural body and in the full likeness of sinful flesh. Romans 8:3
states, "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." He was born in the flesh, but the inner sin nature was not His nature. He was only born in the "likeness" of sinful flesh. If He had had a sin nature, John could not have said of Him, "in him is no sin" (1 John 3:5
) and Paul could not have spoken of Him as the one "who knew no sin" (2 Corinthians 5:21). More reading: http://www.learnthebible.org/did-jesus-have-a-sin-nature.html
Did Jesus Have a Sin Nature?
[\\]The short answer to your question is: No, Jesus did not inherit the sin nature from Adam. Jesus came to succeed where Adam failed. Jesus is called the "last Adam" (1 Corinthians 15:45
) and the "second man" (1 Corinthians 15:47
). Jesus testified that He came "to seek and to save that which was lost" (Luke 19:10
). What was lost in Adam was to be won in Jesus Christ. However, in order to do this, he only needed to start where Adam started, not where he ended.
Much of the purpose of the virgin birth was to allow Jesus to be fully human but without the Adamic nature. Joseph was "the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ" (Matthew 1:16
). Joseph was not the father of Jesus. Jesus did not receive the sinful nature of Joseph. However, He was born in the natural body and in the full likeness of sinful flesh. Romans 8:3
states, "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." He was born in the flesh, but the inner sin nature was not His nature. He was only born in the "likeness" of sinful flesh. If He had had a sin nature, John could not have said of Him, "in him is no sin" (1 John 3:5
) and Paul could not have spoken of Him as the one "who knew no sin" (2 Corinthians 5:21). More reading: http://www.learnthebible.org/did-jesus-have-a-sin-nature.html
You still don't get it because you promote heretical teachings.
Yes Jesus was tempted. Which means that the THREE MAJOR TEMPTATIONS were presented to Him by the Great Deceiver Satan. Well, you should know by now that temptations may be presented but if they bring about absolutely no response from the target (or a total rejection), then they are of no consequences.
Let's take a mundane example. Let's say that you need to reduce your weight and therefore eliminate your intake of ice cream. Someone comes along and puts a carton of ice cream in front of you, but you simple ignore it. Were you tempted externally by some prankster? Yes. Did you respond to the temptation? No.
Oh, grow up, Nehemiah! This place absolutely sucks sometimes. A person can't ask a question or make a point or discuss anything without being called a heretic by someone.
He was tempted on ALL POINTS like we are:
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.
If there is absolutely no response, was there really a temptation?
If you can simply ignore it, then you weren't actually tempted by it.
If you consider it, then reject it, then you were tempted.
Jesus was actually tempted. He could have sinned, but he chose not to.
I find it amazing that God gave His only begotten son to pay with His life by overcoming sin in the flesh, that many here think that He overcame nothing. If Christ could not have sinned, God wasn't giving very much. If Christ had actually sinned Himself, that would nullify His ability to pay for us. That shows love because it involves real risk.
J
jaybird88
Guest
im gonna cut this off here and start with this passage. first all you cut off the beginning of the teaching which is important. a miracle was done and the pharisees rejected it. not only that but they attributed the power to Satan when the power really came from the Father. this is blasphemy against the spirit. DB never said the power of Jesus or the Father came from Satan.
all these other passages are not part of the teaching in Mt 12. i see no reason to add to what Jesus taught. unless your suggesting Jesus forgot something.
Unfortunately, you are responding to the wrong member. Or, if you intended to speak to me, then your mistake was to misrepresent what I was saying and pointing out concerning the blasphemy that is that of DevotiontoBible. Whatever the case you are on the wrong track.
While it is something we don't often contemplate I think it important to point out that not everyone who joins a Christian forum are actually Christian.I find it amazing that God gave His only begotten son to pay with His life by overcoming sin in the flesh, that many here think that He overcame nothing. If Christ could not have sinned, God wasn't giving very much. If Christ had actually sinned Himself, that would nullify His ability to pay for us. That shows love because it involves real risk.
Sadly, there is an element on the Web that enjoy upsetting the peace in a Christian community by joining and pretending to be Christian so a to then make blasphemous, or blatantly errant proclamations about what God's word says and just to get a rise out of the actual Christians that are in that community.
Jesus was not born with a sin nature. We who read the scriptures know this. Would we to carry forth the argument defending in our own words what God's word makes eternally clear? If we choose to do this, prior to we may ask ourselves, what are we serving in that pursuit?
God?
Or other?
God warned us to beware of false prophets.
J
jaybird88
Guest
J
jaybird88
Guest
and i will assume your dodging means you have no rebuttal on the blasphemy against the Spirit.
hahahaha NO, but I do have everything my grandfather taught in the Bible colleges throughout Texas, Oklahoma, and Florida. Plus I have the notes of G.T. Haywood [who wrote the Crimson Stream of Blood] and him and my grandfather started the Pentecostal organization called [Assemblies of the Lord Jesus Christ] and they taught the ONENESS!!
the Catholics created the Trinity and added to the KJV Bible. but it requires someone who KNOWS GOD to see the TRUTH!!
Forgive one that chastises you and says you are not in Christ as they argue repeatedly that Jesus had a sin nature but chose not to sin. Blasphemy of the holy spirit is a deeply fallen state. Forgive.
absolutely right He had a body of flesh but the sinful nature was not in Him as it is in us. we are of the seed of man Jesus was of the seed of the Father who can know no sin. Although Christ felt every temptation and hopelessness and pain as we do he never fail into sin. The perfect lamb of God. Truly the Son of GodHuman but NOT sinful...
indeed, I am not offended and that poster is definitely forgiven. but it is good to be challenged when you walk with God. and it is good to explain yourself for your walk in God. but yes indeed, that poster is most definitely forgiven!!
Wow... um, has it occurred to you that the KJV was produced by protestants, not Catholics? Has it occurred to you that there are plenty of manuscripts that the KJV translators simply did not have?
The KJV of 1611 was overseen by King James and his instruction was that its printing coincide with the doctrine of the Church of England.
But the Trinity teaching itself preceded the 1611 publication during the council of Constantinople in 381 when the trinitarian teaching was affirmed.
You'll note however that Jesus himself in the synoptic gospels never speaks of trinity or the triune nature itself. Because that was not what God wanted. God is one. God is the holy spirit and God was Jesus Christ.
J
jaybird88
Guest
COE is Catholic substance with a protestant name. i hope saying this is not blasphemy against the Spirit.
has it ever occurred to you that within the Catholic Encyclopedia it reveals how in the 2nd century the Catholics changed Matthew 28:19 [Yeshua commanding us to BAPTIZE IN HIS NAME] to the unholy trinity?
has it ever occurred to you to do some RESEARCH and EDUCATE yourself?
has it ever occurred to you that your pastor preaching THREE PERSONS is absolutely WRONG?
has it ever occurred to you there is a reason that YESHUA has the FULL GODHEAD [Father-Son-Holy Ghost] dwelling in Him?
has it ever occurred to you that KING JAMES WAS CATHOLIC and literally BASTARDIZED SCRIPTURE?
has it ever occurred to you why in ISAIAH [100% Hebrew manuscript] there is a LATIN WORD when LATIN was not introduced to the world some 1500 years AFTER ISAIAH was written?
the word is LUCIFER = LATIN = CATHOLIC ADDING TO THE BIBLE!!
has it ever occurred to you to GET A CLUE?
that was wrong of me to break it down like that. sometimes when you do so much research and study, it just rattles off like second nature. but in all seriousness, the KJV Bible has been tampered with. it's why I use the Complete Jewish Bible for the New Testament Aramaic. and I use the CLV for Paul's koine Greek. if you try those versions and test them against the KJV, you will educate yourself!!