Sin Nature?

I don't know if He shared her genes, based on the shroud of Turin hers would have been too short and tight in the hips...He looked like a size 34

 

This is what I personally believe, but there's nothing in Scripture that will support it strongly, so when I touch on this one, I make it clear that it's MY interpretation and not doctrine.

 

Incorrect, Jesus inherited his flesh from Mary.

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and HER SEED; it shalt bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise thy heel.

Jesus was fully human and inherited his flesh from his mother Mary.

God is not flesh, God is a spirit.

 

Well, I might say God prepared His body for Him, as Scripture said.

 

Science has shown us we inherit half of our genes from our mother, and the other half from our father.

 

Since Joseph is not Christ's father, then whose paternal genes does He have ? Intriguing thought, wot ?

 

James 1:13 says God cannot be tempted with evil, but the scriptures say Jesus was tempted in all points as we are, but without sin.

Then how could Jesus be tempted? Through his human flesh of course.

And James 1:14 says, "But EVERY MAN is tempted, when he is drawn away of his OWN LUST,"

Jesus had lust and desire, he was very hungry after he fasted 40 days, this is why Satan was able to tempt him with bread.

We think of "lust" as evil, but the Bible meaning is desire, as when it says to desire the milk of the word. Lust itself is not evil.

 

"The" Father

 

Interesting point, but I wonder if Jesus fits into this category since he’s 100% man (cf Heb 2:14-18) & 100% God (cf Phil 2:6-8). And since he has always been God—did he technically ever inherit anything from his Father? Or was that simply just how he always existed? It seems the only real inherited traits could come from his mother (ie the 100% man element). But even this has to consider the Holy Spirit’s role in his “conception,” the genuine meaning of “begotten” (which however it’s interpreted cannot be anything less than eternal existence), & how he existed in his pre-incarnate state —man the incarnation can be difficult to fully understand!

 

Hello friend—you might want to research the peccability (Christ could have sinned but did not) verses the impeccability (Christ could have never really sinned regardless) debate---not sure how much it will help but ur questions remind me of this debate. There are a few other topics that your questions remind me of that I’ll have to look up real quick & get back with you when I get that time—but very thought provoking questions regardless.

 

Amy, this is the very problem the Catholics were confronted with, this is why they invented the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception thats says through a special grace of God that Mary was conceived without the stain of original sin. This is what happens when you believe sin is passed down through your parents.

We all have lusts and desires, but these are not evil in themselves. Even Augustine said this.

It is only when you act on these desires that you commit sin, Augustine said this as well.

This is not much different than folks who say guns are evil. A gun is neither good or evil, but can be used for both.

Our natural desires are not evil as long as we control them within the boundaries set by God. Just as it is perfectly alright to own a gun until you commit a crime with it.

 

Not saying your completely wrong—but how would you reconcile Matt 5:27-30 with this statement? Where Jesus stresses the lustful intention over the act itself. Further the act of coveting is not necessarily an outward action, but is still considered sinful. Although I agree that the initial natural desire is not the problem but the prolonged thought, the act of “entertaining” a sinful thought can still be considered problematic. I ask b/c I very well could be missing your point & you very well could be answering my question when you say “Our natural desires are not evil as long as we control them within the boundaries set by God..”

 

Good question. We also have to remember that Adam and Jesus were two unique humans, too. To be tempted by definition means the possibility to succumb exists, and having been tempted in every manner as we are (remember, Adam wasn't tempted...Eve was) it would imply He was tempted as man was post fall.

I believe even as a child He didn't succumb as all of His actions were Spirit lead, like ours will be one day.

 

That is an excellent question, and not one I can answer with certainty. When does lust become sin?

For example only, we might see a very beautiful woman who we are immediately attracted to. This is natural, and not sinful.

It is where we go after this that determines whether we sin or not. In our imagination we might conceive of commiting adultery or fornication with this woman. We can immediately recognize these as sinful thoughts and put them out of our mind. In this case I do not think we have sinned. However, realizing this is wrong, if we continue to dwell on this imagination, then we have willingly sinned.

But to know the exact point where we cross from mere desire to sin is difficult to know with certainty. But I would think it is that moment we willingly decide to continue to do that which we know is wrong.

 

The sin nature is not something, but the lack of something, and that is life. We are all born spiritually dead.

It came from the fact that Adam died in the Garden, and he had no life that he could impart to his children.

The mother cannot give spiritual life any more than the father, so the Virgin Birth was not for the cause of Christ's sinlessness. The Scriptures tell us why Christ was born of a Virgin, and that was for a sign.

 

Christ's life is from Himself, not Mary. I'm saying Adam could not give life.

Stop thinking of sin as if it were something. Think of it as the LACK of something. Here's an example. Let's say that you needed sight to get into heaven, but you were born blind. Blindness isn't something, it's the LACK something. It's the lack of sight.

The sin nature is the lack of life.

(Forget about the Virgin Birth. I was just answering a common superstition about it. The Virgin Birth has nothing to do with the sin nature or sinlessness of Christ.)