Yes, we all agree Jesus did not choose to sin, but to say that He was internally tempted is also very problematic. It would mean He is not God if such were the case because James 1:13 says God cannot be tempted with evil.
Has anyone found secret messages in the bible?
- Thread starter NTNT58
- 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.
Yes, we all agree Jesus did not choose to sin, but to say that He was internally tempted is also very problematic. It would mean He is not God if such were the case because James 1:13 says God cannot be tempted with evil.
I believe all believers should feel welcome to discuss what they feel the Word of God says here.
May God’s peace shine upon you.
I never said Catholics are correct or that they have spiritual authority, I said the Pope has the physical authority over the church according to Mathew 16:19 and Isiah 22.
That is completely irrelevant. Peter being rebuked just means he didn't have the absolute authority that modern Catholics assign to themselves. And Peter denying Jesus just means he wasn't infallible, and I never claimed he was.
That is incorrect. After His resurrection, Jesus told the disciples, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (John 20:23).
According to Matthew 16:19 "AS IMAGINED BY THE CHURCH OF ROME" should have been added. But not really according to Scripture, since Peter is not mentioned even once in the epistle to the Romans. Peter was the apostle to the "Circumcision" (Jews) and he focused on that. Even the Orthodox Church refuses to accept the position of the Vatican in this matter (since the Greek Orthodox Church existed long before the Roman Catholic Church).
After quoting the whole post, following any section you wish to isolate, insert the end quote tag.
It looks like this: [ /quote] <= I put in a space so you can see the tag, otherwise it's invisible.
After you insert the end quote tag, put your response. Make sure not to mess with the coding.
After your response is the rest of the other person's post which you quoted.
Highlight the next part you wish to isolate to respond to, and then using the icon above the message box, the downward pointing arrow with three dots, select the second option which is "quote" and it will wrap your highlighted section in quote tags. You could also do this manually in two different ways, one which keeps the link back to the original post. After you have finished responding to the points you wish to address, make sure there is only one [ /QUOTE] at the end of what the other person said. You can check your post's format by using the Preview selection before sending it to post. You have a five minute edit window to correct any mistakes.
There are no prophets in heaven, so Jesus was talking about John simply as a human being/soul.
Jesus revealed the truth about spiritual kingdom as early as Mathew 13 in parable of the sower, parable of wheat and tares etc.
You are completely right. The fact is that Jesus of Nazareth DID NOT have the indwelling sin nature which responds to temptations. He was born of a virgin and His conception was supernatural. Therefore He COULD NOT SIN. So (1)He could not sin, (2) He would not sin, and (3) He had no sin. Temptations were "water off a duck's back" as far as Jesus was concerned.
Of course no one should expect Satan to be all knowing, and Satan imagined that because Christ is a Man, He can be tempted. And he discovered that Christ could not be tempted regardless of the temptation. Had the remotest possibility of Him being tempted existed, He could not have become the Savior of the world.
The Bible says that Jesus was "tempted in all points like as we are yet WITHOUT SIN". This needs to be interpreted in view of His being fully God and fully sinless Man at one and the same time.
Just in case you missed these...
Matthew 3:1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.
Mark 1:13 And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan
Luke 4:1-2a And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, Being forty days tempted of the devil
Hebrews 4:14-15 ... Jesus the Son of God ... was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
I'm so biting my tongue right now....
before Cain had sin, God told him that sin was crouching at the door and its desire was for him and that he must rule over it. Unlike Cain, or anyone else, Jesus is Master over sin.
That’s a very odd interpretation. I see it as in reference to the Israelites. Psalms 82:6 says, "all of you are children of the most High.” Just because it says they will die like men in verse 7 does not mean they are divine beings. My point by bringing this verse up is that you cannot read Jesus’ quote in John 10 as in reference to ”ye are gods” as a reference to deity. Even angels are not of the substance of deity like God. Only God is deity, and eternal and all powerful. There are no gods beside Him. So how does this relate to Jesus saying what He did to the Jews?
He is most likely talking about internal temptation and not external temptation. Jesus could face others trying to tempt Him to do things externally, but He was not internally tempted or interested in the temptation given by the outward party.
So do you believe Jesus took on our sins in the Garden within the cup from the Father gave to Him? I do.
Jesus was said to have bore our sins in his body according to the apostle Peter.
So…. If this is the case, how can He be a spotless Lamb if He Himself struggled with internal temptation to sin? It makes absolutely zero sense especially when James 1:13 says God cannot be tempted with sin. So this really comes down to whether or not you believe Jesus is God. Jesus said He is one with the Father, and so one cannot say that He is any less in deity or connection in the Godhead or Trinity. Spiritually speaking: Something unclean cannot clean that which is dirty. If we are to follow the conclusion of your wrong belief, Jesus would be dirty if one is saying He was internally tempted by sins like us. But Hebrews 7:26 says He was separate from sinners. Come on now. Figure it out. Jesus is God. Not just in name but in power and essence right down to His very core.
Peter wasn't mentioned in the Romans because he wasn't in Rome.
That's true, but that doesn't disprove his authority over the other disciples, if anything that only proves my point. Jews are God's children and were always the main focus of God, that's why it was Peter who was assigned as chief for them, while the Gentiles were assigned Paul, who wasn't even one of the original 12 apostles.
That is incorrect. The Catholic church existed as one church from the beginning. It wasn't until the 4th century when it became the official religion of Rome, and it wasn't until the 11th century that the Eastern Orthodox separated themselves from the Western Catholics. Up until that time they were one church.
This is the passage you referenced
Christ’s Example of Suffering
(Isaiah 53:1–8)
21For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in His footsteps:
22“He committed no sin,
and no deceit was found in His mouth.”
23When they heaped abuse on Him,
He did not retaliate;
when He suffered, He made no threats,
but entrusted Himself to Him who judges justly.
24He Himself bore our sins
in His body on the tree,
so that we might die to sin
and live to righteousness.
“By His stripes you are healed.”
25For “you were like sheep going astray,” but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
notice the qualification of when He bore our sins, on the cross He suffered ("for you" v. 21). Do you see this as His actually accumulating unclean spots on Himself?
this fact alone arguably makes him far more important than any other apostle.
remember the central priesthood/covenant argument of the epistle to the Hebrews: if tge first had been sufficient, there would be no need for another.
in Sinai was perfect JESUS OF NAZARETH would be utterly useless.
but the opposite is true.
14 total named tribes.
always counted as 12 always depending on how you count.
same for apostles
Joseph, an incomparably important son, becomes Ephraim and Menassah, depending on how you count, 12, always, of 14
Judas, an incomparably important apostle, is replaced by Paul and Matthias, depending on how you count, 12, always, of 14
what if your utterly worldly focus on Peter 'apostle to the Jews' worship as apostle 'to the Gentile Romans ((self-contadictory much?))' makes you miss the actual Biblical pattern
what will you do if that is the case?
always counted as 12 always depending on how you count.
same for apostles
Joseph, an incomparably important son, becomes Ephraim and Menassah, depending on how you count, 12, always, of 14
Judas, an incomparably important apostle, is replaced by Paul and Matthias, depending on how you count, 12, always, of 14
what if your utterly worldly focus on Peter 'apostle to the Jews' worship as apostle 'to the Gentile Romans ((self-contadictory much?))' makes you miss the actual Biblical pattern
what will you do if that is the case?