The Impeccability of Christ

And this sums up the hold doctrine of the impeccability of Christ. :thumbs:

 

I disagree. You have miss-applied the scripture:

Let the Bible be used to understand the Bible.

Bro. Paul, the middle man author (God is the Author)
uses "Iesus Christ yesterday, and to day, the same also is for euer. "
to show you-all can depend upon Messiah Iesus when He says:
"I will not faile thee, neither forsake thee:"
If Jesus did not fail you-all nor forsake you-all
in the past - He won't change now nor in the future.
Yeshua, the Messiah, has NEVER failed me (i admit to my shame,
i have failed Him), not ever in the past. I can be sure He will not
fail me now -- though I am offered up as a burnt offering -
HE AIN'T CHANGIN'.

Ed notes that Jesus was a little baby in the manger,
one day will be a conquering Warrier (Revelation 9),
He has been a man raised alive again -- there are differences
but NO DIFFERENCE in the fidelity of Messiah Yeshua --
you can always depend upon Messiah Yeshua;
he will not fail you-all nor forsake you-all. Amen?

Jesus could have yielded to temptation (sinned)
but HE DID NOT -- He alone is worthy to forgive ALL MY SINS,
He alone is worthy to BE MY ETERNAL LORD & SAVIOR.
He alone is double-plus-GOOD.

 

HP: An excellent post my friend:thumbs:

 

"Yesterday" He could not thirst, could not be thirsty, could not get tired, could not be picked up and held like a baby...

I see anyone and everyone can show how it is we can be tempted to do things wrong that we can actually do wrong -- I see no one showing how we can be tempted to do something that is impossible.

how many here have been tempted to turn stone into bread and eat it?

A show of hands please....hmmm ... no one??!

Ok that is what I thought.:sleeping_2:

in Christ,

Bob

 

HP: Do you deny that the possibility has to exist to do something other than what one does for temptation to take place? Has anyone ever tried to tempt a rock?
(Notice I did not answer yes or no so we can still discuss with each other:laugh: )

 

Heb 5 says that He learned through the things he suffered

7 In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety.
8 Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered.
9 And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation,

Surely we have to admit that this was not "Christ yesterday" as in before His incarnation.

I have to think that "Tempted in all points as we are yet without sin" does not mean "tempted to do the impossible for him - and of course it was impossible"

 

deleted to to BR pushing 'send' before I did.

 

Question for Pastor Bob (who is usually right on almost everything that I have seen him post on - )...:thumbs:

What is the "down side" to having Christ victorious over sin in a temptation-trial-suffering context where He COULD fail but stoof firm and did not?

What do we miss/lose/suffer in that case?:type:

in Christ,

Bob

 

BR has been known to type verrrry fast!:laugh:

 

1Pe 2:21 For euen hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for vs, leauing vs an example, that yee should follow his steps 1Pe 2:22 Who did no SINNIE, neither was guile found in his mouth. 1Pe 2:23 Who when hee was reuiled, reuiled not againe; when hee suffered, hee threatned not, but committed himselfe to him that iudgeth righteously 1Pe 2:24 Who his owne selfe bare our sinnes in his owne body on the tree, that wee being dead to sinnes, should liue vnto righteousnesse, by whose stripes ye were healed. Who said Christ sinned needs to be ashamed of that. He was the son of God. PERFECT.

 

HP: This indicates to me that it was indeed due to His performance on earth that allowed Him to ‘become’ the source of our eternal salvation. “Been made” speaks of an active ongoing trial for Christ that He endured and won.

At the heart of the issue is the matter of morality. Is God moral? Is God love? Is God Just? Is God Good? All these things involve choice. I believe it was Amy a few days ago that brought up the point that love demand choice. Choice indicates two or more possibilities. We will all agree that God always chooses the right and has promised not to change.

 

I believe that Jesus was a man of faith. I personally believe that He had to accept His position as God by faith as well.

 

Charles:
You have the same problem my 82-year-old mother
has on her own board No matter how you type it,
it is all jammed together. I'll see if I can figure her problem
out and share it with you if I do. :wavey:

 

What did you mean by that?

 

HP: Why do these words have to be interpreted as if though it was impossible to do otherwise? Why cannot these words just be stating a fact as it is, in that He has not and will not change regardless of any and all possibilities? Is it that we could not trust God if he REALLY had the ability to love?

 

Write two different paragraphs.

Like this.

Your post would be easier to read like this:

 

HP: I don’t know about you, but I am putting my money on Charles.:laugh:

 

1. I just wrote a 30pg essay on Theology Proper, and once again, I was reminded of how awesome God is, so I join with Paul and say:

33 Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,
and his paths beyond tracing out!
34 "Who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has been his counselor?"
35 "Who has ever given to God,
that God should repay him?"
36 For from him and through him and to him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen. (Rom. 8:33-36, NIV, emphasis mine).

2. When did the Christ cease being God?

3. Are we not content with the mystery of the Incarnation?

4. Heresies are born when we attempt to go beyond what is written and are not content with secret will of God.