How did Jesus keep from sinning?

[makesends]

This is the answer IMO.
God cannot sin by definition.

I agree, BUT ...He did not do it as a result of being sinless, but as a result of doing it the way we are supposed to. There was nothing automatic about it.

... he was/is God so you are saying He depended on Himself. Granted, Jesus is a subset of God as shown be Him not being omnipresent or all knowing.

Well, no, I'm not saying he depended on himself. (And, aside, there may be something definitive of the persons of the Trinity in that subject.) I'm saying he depended on the Father. He and the Father being one does not translate into Human Language well.

 

[fastfredy0]

I agree, BUT ...He did not do it as a result of being sinless, but as a result of doing it the way we are supposed to. There was nothing automatic about it.

Well, no, I'm not saying he depended on himself. (And, aside, there may be something definitive of the persons of the Trinity in that subject.) I'm saying he depended on the Father. He and the Father being one does not translate into Human Language well.

Being sinless is an effect and not a cause so by definition one does not remain sinless as a result (caused by) being sinless. (hmmm... sounds like double talk .. oh well)

Well, no, I'm not saying he depended on himself. (And, aside, there may be something definitive of the persons of the Trinity in that subject.) I'm saying he depended on the Father. He and the Father being one does not translate into Human Language well.

... too deep ... I swim in the shallow section of the pool with the Christian guppies.


Where have you been hiding? Haven't seen you for awhile.

 

[Mr GLee]

Being sinless is an effect and not a cause so by definition one does not remain sinless as a result (caused by) being sinless. (hmmm... sounds like double talk .. oh well)


... too deep ... I swim in the shallow section of the pool with the Christian guppies.


Where have you been hiding? Haven't seen you for awhile.

It would seem being sinless is the cause. He forgives all our sin.

 

[makesends]

makesends said:
I agree, BUT ...He did not do it as a result of being sinless, but as a result of doing it the way we are supposed to. There was nothing automatic about it.

Well, no, I'm not saying he depended on himself. (And, aside, there may be something definitive of the persons of the Trinity in that subject.) I'm saying he depended on the Father. He and the Father being one does not translate into Human Language well.

Being sinless is an effect and not a cause so by definition one does not remain sinless as a result (caused by) being sinless. (hmmm... sounds like double talk .. oh well)

My point is that he remained sinless in the most earthy and difficult of ways —that it was not what we think of as, 'automatic' since he was God.

... too deep ... I swim in the shallow section of the pool with the Christian guppies.

Probably where most of us should learn to swim. But I've got these floaties, and I found a pool noodle. Pretending I know what to do in the deep end.

Where have you been hiding? Haven't seen you for awhile.

Been on a 3-week trip to see friends and do some work. About to embark on another one. Trying to see if my laptop will not put me over 50 lbs this time.

 

[Mr GLee]

makesends said:
I agree, BUT ...He did not do it as a result of being sinless, but as a result of doing it the way we are supposed to. There was nothing automatic about it.

Well, no, I'm not saying he depended on himself. (And, aside, there may be something definitive of the persons of the Trinity in that subject.) I'm saying he depended on the Father. He and the Father being one does not translate into Human Language well.

My point is that he remained sinless in the most earthy and difficult of ways —that it was not what we think of as, 'automatic' since he was God.

Probably where most of us should learn to swim. But I've got these floaties, and I found a pool noodle. Pretending I know what to do in the deep end.

Been on a 3-weed trip to see friends and do some work. About to embark on another one. Trying to see if my laptop will not put me over 50 lbs this time.

You offered He and the Father being one does not translate into Human Language well.

Yes, it's the kind of religion Christ puts his stamp of approval on. To strengthen the believers' fatherless. . widows .

Knowing we were widows without our Heaven Father before we became his bride

James 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

The special care of the household of the faith of Christ


Ephesians 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God

 

[Lees]

Jesus Christ was the God/Man. 100% God and 100% Man. Jesus could not sin. Even in His humanity, He could not sin.

In His temptations, He suffered. (Heb. 2:18) "For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted."

In other words, Christ felt the draw of the temptation. To the extent that He suffered in not yielding to it.

(Heb. 5:8) "Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered." Strange that Jesus the Son needs to learn obedience. Was there ever a time when the Son was disobedient? Of course not. But the Son as God alone never felt the draw to be anything other than obedient.

But once He was given a body of man, though He were the Son, He felt it all. It was impossible for Him to sin, but He now felt the tremendous power and draw of it. And He suffered in always saying no to it. Thus obedience was not just automatic because He was/is the Son. Obedience was a learned thing in His life.

My opinion.

Lees

 

[Mr GLee]

Jesus Christ was the God/Man. 100% God and 100% Man. Jesus could not sin. Even in His humanity, He could not sin.

In His temptations, He suffered. (Heb. 2:18) "For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted."

In other words, Christ felt the draw of the temptation. To the extent that He suffered in not yielding to it.

(Heb. 5:8) "Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered." Strange that Jesus the Son needs to learn obedience. Was there ever a time when the Son was disobedient? Of course not. But the Son as God alone never felt the draw to be anything other than obedient.

But once He was given a body of man, though He were the Son, He felt it all. It was impossible for Him to sin, but He now felt the tremendous power and draw of it. And He suffered in always saying no to it. Thus obedience was not just automatic because He was/is the Son. Obedience was a learned thing in His life.

My opinion.

Lees

Hi thanks
I once had that same (3) kind of idea .It just does not seen to pan out, I believe .

Why do you think the wrath coming is described as those who worship the creature the Son of Man, Jesus above the Holy Father the living word of God

Romans 1:2;Who changed the truth of God (father) into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature (Jesus the Son of man) more than the Creator (Father ), who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Satan turns things upside down inspired from earth.

The Son gave glory to the Holy Father, not of his own dying, powerless self.

 

[Carbon]

So what kept Him from sinning?

He is God, God doesn't sin.

 

[makesends]

Hobie said:
So what kept Him from sinning?

He is God, God doesn't sin.

This is a subject that to me is about as intriguing as intriguing gets. The same theme is pervasive in the debate between the Reformed and Self-determinists of all sorts. The Reformed are accused of believing in a system where "everything is automatic", (so, (the self-determinists say), why even try, since everything that is going to happen as God planned is going to happen regardless of what we do?)

It is not automatic. It is only sure. Christ did not sin, not because him being God made it easy to not sin, but because it is sure, that God does not sin.

Further, it is self-contradictory to say that God could have sinned, since sin is rebellion against God. It is silly to say that God can rebel against God. Thus, if Jesus had sinned, he would not have been God. This by no means indicates that the temptation was bogus, but only that, since he was God, he could not have sinned.

 

[Carbon]

Hobie said:
So what kept Him from sinning?

This is a subject that to me is about as intriguing as intriguing gets. The same theme is pervasive in the debate between the Reformed and Self-determinists of all sorts. The Reformed are accused of believing in a system where "everything is automatic", (so, (the self-determinists say), why even try, since everything that is going to happen as God planned is going to happen regardless of what we do?)

It is not automatic. It is only sure. Christ did not sin, not because him being God made it easy to not sin, but because it is sure, that God does not sin.

Further, it is self-contradictory to say that God could have sinned, since sin is rebellion against God. It is silly to say that God can rebel against God. Thus, if Jesus had sinned, he would not have been God. This by no means indicates that the temptation was bogus, but only that, since he was God, he could not have sinned.

Or how about the question, "If Jesus is God, how (why) did he age?"

 

[makesends]

Or how about the question, "If Jesus is God, how (why) did he age?"

Well said, bro. In the end, it is of the same thinking.

 

[fastfredy0]

Further, it is self-contradictory to say that God could have sinned, since sin is rebellion against God. It is silly to say that God can rebel against God.

Good point.

Premise1: God cannot sin by definition
Premise2: Jesus is God
Conclusion: Jesus cannot sin by definition

God is sovereign. He is the First Cause; thus, there are no rules that effect God. God makes the rules for men, not Himself. God does whatever He wants (His essence determines what He does).

 

[Mr GLee]

Or how about the question, "If Jesus is God, how (why) did he age?"

Exactly, God is not a man that he could age ( die).

 

[makesends]

Carbon said:
Or how about the question, "If Jesus is God, how (why) did he age?"

Exactly, God is not a man that he could age ( die).

Ha! I expected you would chime in on that!

By now that you are familiar with the usual answer to that --that Jesus Christ "did not consider equality with God a thing to be grasped". That statement implies that he by nature WAS equal to God, but that he did not hold himself to that, but "gave it up", in order to live as a man, according to human nature (but not according to sin, nor the Romans 8 "mind of flesh").

While admittedly it is difficult to grasp the concept of the "hypostatic union" of two natures in one person, that is the only reasonable explanation that fits with the rest of Scripture.

We, in modern times, have a tendency to think from the POV of "How can he be God, if he was man?", but the puzzlement and amazement expressed in Scripture is, "How can he be man, if he was God?" You seem to come at it with, "He cannot be one, if he is the other", but that assumes to know the nature of God, and assumes to know exactly what man is. We know neither, except that we are mere creatures. Jesus was not mere creature.

If your fear is that the meaning of "God" be mixed with the meaning of "Man", that is understandable. But don't re-interpret Scripture to fit your common sense intuition. The two natures were not mixed, nor separated, in Jesus Christ.

 

[Mr GLee]

By now that you are familiar with the usual answer to that --that Jesus Christ "did not consider equality with God a thing to be grasped". That statement implies that he by nature WAS equal to God, but that he did not hold himself to that, but "gave it up", in order to live as a man, according to human nature (but not according to sin, nor the Romans 8 "mind of flesh").

I am familiar with the idea that Christ the anointing teacher the husband of the bride (the church)

He worked in her displaying his 'let there be' good power and "it was"

John6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

Learning of the father (Christ in us) and coming to the flesh of Jesus dying mankind. Of Jesus own flesh he declares it profits for zero . Its not flesh we need but a new spirit spiritual words of eternal life

John6:63-68 ;It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.;From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

Not thou has flesh of eternal life

The dead know nothing

 

[makesends]

I am familiar with the idea that Christ the anointing teacher the husband of the bride (the church)

He worked in her displaying his 'let there be' good power and "it was"

John6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

Learning of the father (Christ in us) and coming to the flesh of Jesus dying mankind. Of Jesus own flesh he declares it profits for zero . Its not flesh we need but a new spirit spiritual words of eternal life

John6:63-68 ;It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.;From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

Not thou has flesh of eternal life

The dead know nothing

Flesh is not all that humans are made of.

 

[Mr GLee]

Flesh is not all that humans are made of.

Flesh our largest organ. It is all that clothes a spirit

Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have

 

[Carbon]

Jesus existed bodily in the form of sinful flesh of man, - passed down from his earthly father David and Mother Mary.

It is important to remember, no sin was passed to Jesus from his mother. Jesus was sinless.

 

[Mr GLee]

It is important to remember, no sin was passed to Jesus from his mother. Jesus was sinless.

Yes, the father who empowered the Son, dying mankind kept it from sinning.

 

[Hobie]

No sin nature?

God can't sin?

You to look in Gods Word and see where Christ was tempted in the wilderness, if He could not have fallen as He was fully man, then it was just a charade. But He came just as we are, and overcame temptation as He asks of us and is our example..