CHRIST: Sinless or not?

'... was tempted in all points like as we are, yet without sin.'

Quoted from memory so I do not know if I said this exactly accurately, per any version, or not.

However-

Enough said, as to His sinlessness.

Moderators, the OP has asked at least twice that this thread be closed. After reading all 18+ pages of this same old stuff, I second that motion.

Ed

 

The only wiggle room is that he either accused him of "enorsing" (sic) or drinking. He did neither. So, he did bear false witness one way or another.
CC is just like my dad.
My dad doesn't drink. Doesn't endorse it.
BUt isn't so naive to think that Jesus didn't drink it.

 

I will add my name to that motion.
I am ashamed of myself for continuing this long in it.

 

Believe what you want.

I believe he did accuse me, but his grammar just isn't very good.

However, even if he did NOT accuse me of drinking, he DID accuse me of endorsing drink. Which is ALSO false witness, because nowhere in this thread have I stated that I think people should drink or start drinking.

So either way, he bore false witness. So YOUR point is MOOT.

 

When you say that Jesus drank alcohol, you are giving the impression to others that it is ok to drink alcohol.

Whether or not you want to call it endorsing it, you are endorsing it.

 

Amen, Dale. I couldn't have said it better myself.

You have hit the nail on the head. :thumbs:

 

I might also add that if you ask my dad he will tell you that he advises against drinking.
He limits that to advice, he will not say you are wrong if you don't listen to him, he will just advise you against it.

 

The nail may have been hit on the head, but the house is being built to fall.

 

You're extrapolating, thus your statement is false.

 

Who said a house was being built with the nail? You're once again engaging in wild extrapolation.

Your trite slogans are meaningless, so stop being petty.

 

I really don't think it applies here but just because Jesus said/did something doesn't mean it is automatically ok for us.
For instance it would be idolatry for any of us to claim divinity.

 

I agree completely with your Dad.

The best policy is "Do NOT drink", and I haven't touched a drop in 24 years. When anybody asks, I always clearly state that I don't drink. I advise people I talk to, especially young people, NOT to drink.

I know my critics on this thread are somehow going to construe my above paragraph as an "endorsement", but that will simply prove that they are the type who believe what they wish, regardless of the facts.
:tonofbricks:

 

The Bible says we are to pattern ourselves after the Lord. You say the Lord drank alcohol. That is endorsing alcohol in the life of a Christian.

Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy. (1 Peter 1:16)

He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked. (1 John 2:6)

It certainly is endorsing alcohol if you say Christ drank alcohol

 

Lets see, you must be a prophet!

This is getting predictable.

Oh, and no, it isn't an endorsement to say "Jesus did it"
It is just saying that He did it.
Christ also wore robes in public. I am SURE not going to wear a robe in public if I can help it.
By your definition of "Christ like" why are you not wearing a robe everywhere you go?

 

The Bible can't possibly say that Jesus braided a whip and used it, and overturned tables in the temple. That would be violence, and since we are to pattern ourselves after the Lord, to admit He did those things would be to endorse rebellion against the temple and violence. Ignore anyone who believes Jesus did these things, since they can't possibly be following the real Jesus.

 

You once again bear false witness, and prove that your logic is extremely weak.

Christ used physical violence to overturn the tables of the moneychangers in the temple, and he also struck some of them with a whip, as well as calling them names.

Does that mean I'm "endorsing" violence if I tell that story?! Of course not! I'm sure just about every Christian pastor and Sunday school teacher in the world, not to mention MILLIONS of Christian laymen and parents, have told that story MILLIONS of times to their flocks, children etc.

Using your poor logic, we must assume that Christ and all those millions of Christians were endorsing violence and namecalling!

Which is NONSENSE! Christ and all those millions were in NO WAY endorsing violence!

Nor am I endorsing alcohol by merely posting an in-context quote from the Bible!

If a Pastor tells the story of God sending an angel of death in the night to slay 165,000 Assyrians in their sleep, by your logic he must be "endorsing" mass murder! Which is NONSENSE!

 

Amen, Nick! Either you read my mind, or I read yours. :thumbs:

 

Great minds, brother!

 

“Is it probable that Christ took an intoxicating liquor, which in all the ages past had been the cause of misery and ruin, and which in all ages to come would destroy myriads in temporal and eternal destruction; that he took the wine which His own inspired Word declared was ‘the poison of asps,’ ‘the poison of serpents,’ ‘the poison of dragons,’ whose deadly bite is like a serpent, and whose fatal sting is like an adder, and made that the symbol of his atonement, saying, ‘This is the New Testament in my blood’?” (Patton, Bible Wines 86-87)

One who studies the Word of God effectively has to come to the conclusion that He would not.

 

If that's so true, why do you have to quote something other than the Bible? I'll tell you why - because the "poison of serpents & dragons" quote is taken entirely out of context. Your argument is laughable.