Jesus had a human nature?

Curious...if He was not able to sin, then He would not have been able to be tempted...yet Scripture is clear He was.

 

it doesn't.

 

Jesus was tempted as man is, felt the desire and urge to do as man does, and wanted to satisfy the flesh as man does. This was never made more clear than in the garden just prior to His crucficxion. One of the things that makes His sinnlessness so mazing is His ability to choose to go against His Father and yet not having done so. To see this any other way is to diminish His human nature. And in the end that just is not necessary.

The whole point of this portion of scripture is that when we come to God in prayer we have an advocate that understands just how tough the battle with this flesh is. Christ understands all to well our weaknesses, our stress, our desire for excesses etc. It cannot be said that God has no understanding of what we are going through. He knows very clearly:

Luke 23:34 - Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.

 

I agree, excellent post.

 

1 John 3:5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.

There was no sin in Christ Jesus at all.

The desire to sin is in man because man is born with a sin nature.

I do not believe Christ had a sin nature; therefore, He had desire to sin.

When He prayed in the Garden, "Father, if it be Thy will, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless not my will, but thine' I do not believe His stating 'not my will, but thine' was saying that His flesh wanted to sin.

Christ knew the spiritual suffering He was facing and that is what He agonized over.

In the Defender's Study Bible, concerning Hebrews 4:15, Dr. Henry Morris states:

 

double post

 

triple post

 

Isn't that what people are meaning when they say "sin nature" - the sinful nature, i.e., the fallen nature?

I think the above, along with other passages, give us a basis for believing that man has a fallen nature that rebels against God (called the sin nature).

I am just a teeny-weensy bit frustrated :saint: that that one verse keeps getting misquoted. Let's get it right if we are going to quote it:

 

Christ was not born with a nature to sin. If He had had the propensity to sin as all men are born with that propensity, then He would not be sinless.

Remember when Christ said, 'But whosoever looketh after a woman, to lust after her in his heart, hath already committed adultery"?

To say Christ had the same sinful desires, but did not give in to them would be including Him as having lusted after women in His heart, but not committing the act physically.

He would have been a sinner, unworthy to go to the cross for mankind.

Christ did not have a sin nature.

 

Propensity does not equal sin.

I believe it is a difficult task to weigh the dichotomy between the two natures of Christ. Scripture says Christ was tempted "as we are" tempted. It also says Christ was without sin.

To attempt to work it out beyond that by trying to understand a infinite, Holy, omniscient, and omnipitent God is folly and is better left alone. It most certainly is beyond us.

God Bless

 

I'm in the camp that believes Jesus could have sinned since He was also 100% human, and humans sin...but the above bolded statement I'm confused by. Do you mean to say that if Christ gave in to the flesh (His humanity) and obeyed satan...that is not sin?

 

Apples and oranges

There is a big difference in casting out demons and bowing to them. Had Christ obeyed them by turning stone to bread, He would have been bowing to them.

God gave allowance to satan when he allowed him to trouble Job.

In the testing in the wilderness, Jesus fought the devil with the Word of God. In the case of the demoniac, He fought the devil in an entirely different manner.

Notice what happened to the swine? They all drowned! He dealt with those devils by sending them to the abyss.

 

He did not "obey." They made a request and He consented. That's a very different thing.

 

Jesus could not/would not sin.

Jesus was tempted in every point as we are but He never yielded.

The two are not mutally exclusive.

Nowhere that I know of does the Scripture say the source of Jesus temptations were internal.

They were always from an external source.

And that IMO is why the temptations were presented to Him.
To prove to the universe of His creation that He was incapable of yielding to any temptation - internal (of which there was nothing for satan to appeal to) or external.


HankD

 

He granted their wish, knowing they would go down into the water with the drowning pigs, something I'm sure they did not anticipate. The joke was on them. I see humor in this account.

 

There sure is a joke in this account... first mention of 'deviled ham' in the Bible.

Seriously, since Jesus knew the nature of the pig, and the nature of the devils, He knew exactly what would happen.

 

Did He merely "know" or determine the whole affair? Of course the latter.