Who Created or Made a Sin Nature?

[Behold]

If you say this sin nature exists, then someone other than Christ had to create it, .

The sin nature exists as REBELLION against......God
This is the "iniquity"", that was found IN Lucifer... and He was cast out of Heaven for this reason.

Jesus saw him "FALL".
and Adam FELL.

See that?
The Devil fell from Glory, and Adam fell into the adamic nature.

How did it happen?
It happened because Lucifer used His freewill to LUST.
Adam used His free will to do the same.

Lucifer wanted to "exalt His Throne above God's", because His LUST was that Great.
Adam and Eve wanted to experience what God forbid.
Thats LUST.
The sin nature is LUST.

The "corruption in the world" is "through LUST"., 2nd Peter 1:4.....and that is the fallen nature of the Devil, and of all of the fallen, who are of Adam.

To be born again is to become a partaker of the DIVNE NATURE, which is the Holy Nature of God. Its literally to be born again INTO the Spirit of God by the Holy Spirit of God.
That is how you become a "partaker of the Divine Nature".
This is what it means to become a "new Creation IN CHRIST".

The fallen nature is totally connected to FREE WILL.
The DEVIL< as Lucifer in Glory, had Free will. And he LUSTED for POWER, and that was the Iniquity that was "in him".... that was found as his free will that was His corruption= that is to LUST.
The NT says that Lucifer is the Father of Lies and that he was a murder from the beginning.
That "beginning" was when he first lusted and that was the iniquity that began in him that became his nature.

When Adam and Eve took Lucifer's words in place of God's, then they bowed the knee to their new God, whose nature of sin, became their's.


When we are born again, we are given a new nature, a divine nature, that is to become "one with God' = Spiritually.

"Lust" is the nature of Sin.
So.....When does a person first come to this place that then becomes their "adamic nature".
Its different ages for different people.
Babies, who die, go to heaven, as they have no free will choice yet, so they have no corruption yet that is gained by LUST.
This is a mystery.... and some have tried to explain that MOMENT of becoming the Adamic Nature, as : "the age of accountability".

 

[robert derrick]

The sin nature exists as REBELLION against......God
This is the "iniquity"", that was found IN Lucifer... and He was cast out of Heaven for this reason.

Jesus saw him "FALL".
and Adam FELL.

See that?
The Devil fell from Glory, and Adam fell into the adamic nature.

How did it happen?
It happened because Lucifer used His freewill to LUST.
Adam used His free will to do the same.

Lucifer wanted to "exalt His Throne above God's", because His LUST was that Great.
Adam and Eve wanted to experience what God forbid.
Thats LUST.
The sin nature is LUST.

The "corruption in the world" is "through LUST"., 2nd Peter 1:4.....and that is the fallen nature of the Devil, and of all of the fallen, who are of Adam.

To be born again is to become a partaker of the DIVNE NATURE, which is the Holy Nature of God. Its literally to be born again INTO the Spirit of God by the Holy Spirit of God.
That is how you become a "partaker of the Divine Nature".
This is what it means to become a "new Creation IN CHRIST".

The fallen nature is totally connected to FREE WILL.
The DEVIL< as Lucifer in Glory, had Free will. And he LUSTED for POWER, and that was the Iniquity that was "in him".... that was found as his free will that was His corruption= that is to LUST.
The NT says that Lucifer is the Father of Lies and that he was a murder from the beginning.
That "beginning" was when he first lusted and that was the iniquity that began in him that became his nature.

When Adam and Eve took Lucifer's words in place of God's, then they bowed the knee to their new God, whose nature of sin, became their's.


When we are born again, we are given a new nature, a divine nature, that is to become "one with God' = Spiritually.

"Lust" is the nature of Sin.
So.....When does a person first come to this place that then becomes their "adamic nature".
Its different ages for different people.
Babies, who die, go to heaven, as they have no free will choice yet, so they have no corruption yet that is gained by LUST.
This is a mystery.... and some have tried to explain that MOMENT of becoming the Adamic Nature, as : "the age of accountability".

Agreed again. Not born with a sin nature by seed inheritance in the flesh, but taking it upon ourselves by doing it.

There is no sin nature born with in the flesh, but there is the nature of sin adopted by lusting for sin with the flesh: once adopted, it cannot be done away with but by Christ forgiveness and deliverance from it.

Once adopted by angels, there is no redemption from it.

As you rightly say: By free will in life, not predestined nor predisposed to by birth.

 

[Behold]

As you rightly say: By free will in life, not predestined nor predisposed to by birth.

I have not said that that there is no sin nature, as there is certainly a sin nature that is our : admaic nature.
We are born with it, and we eventually exist AS this nature.

Here is the reality..>"in ADAM all DIE"....

'In Christ" all are made ALIVE, and have ETERNAL LIFE".

"Nature".... the nature, our fallen nature, comes from the Seed.
THat we sin, is a result of having this nature that is corrupted, and LUSTS.
The Seed comes from the Male, or the Male Parent.
WE, humans.... get our seed, or we are SEEDED by a corrupted sinner who is our male parent., and our nature follows exactly as theirs did, all the way back to Adam.

Jesus has no earthly fallen adamic falther, so, he was not born with the fallen "adamic" nature.
Jesus was SEEDED by Holy God, the Holy Spirit.

Also By one man's sin, (Adam) all are made/become sinners, and by one man's righteousness, JESUS.... all who believe and are born again, become a new creation "In Christ".... "seeded" by the Holy Spirit, who Created Jesus.
He , the Holy Spirit, creates the "New Creation", who is the Born Again SPIRITUALLY : Son/Daughter of God.

 

[Blue Dragonfly's]

People keep trying to tell how a sin nature was put into man, with a process for which man is now born with it.

But no one has ever said who did so. Until we have a creator and maker of something new, then there is no such thing that actually exists.

Except in the imagination of people.

Ephesians 2:3
Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.


9 Bible verses about Flesh As The Sinful Nature

 

[robert derrick]

I have not said that that there is no sin nature, as there is certainly a sin nature that is our : admaic nature.
We are born with it, and we eventually exist AS this nature.

We are back to square 1: who created it, and who put it in man's seed and flesh. It was not there when Christ created all flesh mortally. Who put this new nature in man's flesh to pass on to babes in the womb.

Address the simple point made at the beginning of the thread, or there no more to say on the topic.

As I said, I no longer argue with people about whether we are born of a sin nature or not, but only now demand to know who created it and put it in man's seed.

 

[robert derrick]

Ephesians 2:3
Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.


9 Bible verses about Flesh As The Sinful Nature

Thank you, but that is an argument for a sin nature, which can be addressed, but it does not answer the question: who made all babes in the womb the children of wrath, by a sin nature made in the seed of man? Not by choice nor by adopting it, but by being born with it with power to force choosing sinning rather than pleasing God.

Who does that? Who has power to put a powerful sin nature in man's flesh, so as to compel youths to sin with the devil, rather than please God?

 

[robert derrick]

It's a simple question brothers and sisters:

You all agree man was first made of flesh and seed by Christ, that was not corrupted by sin: that had no sin nature within it.

You say after sinning, that a sin nature then existed and entered into man's seed and flesh, which means the seed and flesh made by Christ was changed. Not the spiritual nature of the man and woman, but the physical makeup of the flesh: it's material seed was changed.

Who did that? Who has power to change the very seed and flesh of man created Christ?

This has nothing to do with the soul, heart, nor spirit of man, but the natural flesh that Christ creates on earth from the womb.

To put it in modern terms: who has power with Christ to change the DNA of man? Who can make flesh made by Christ, any different than Christ makes it?

You are saying there is an existence of a powerful nature in seed and flesh of man never made by Christ? Who does that?

Is the devil actually a God and Creator and Maker of something in man's seed and flesh, contrary to the will of Christ?

Is all flesh of babes now made by the devil with his sinning nature in it? If so, say so, and declare that it is no more Christ who is the Creator and Maker of all things, and that there now exists in the flesh of every seed of man and babe in the womb, that is not of Christ, by Christ, nor with Christ.

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

If that is true, then this Scripture no longer applies today.

No flesh of man made by Him with sin nature from the dust, but now all flesh is made by the devil with sin nature from the mother's womb, and Christ has nothing to do with it.

That is what teaching a fallen 'Adamic' race is all about.

Christ is no more the Creator and Maker of all things in heaven and on earth. The devil now is a creator, maker, and god with power to make flesh in his own sinful image by the power of his own spirit.

 

[BeyondET]

That's because those who believe in being born with a sin nature have jumped the shark in the tank.

It didn't exist in seed and flesh of man before the transgression, and yet all the claims are that it is there now.

That of course is the point of the thread. I have left the endless debate about whether man has sin nature or not by birth, and so I go back to when the shark was jumped in the first place.

How did it get there? Who put it there? Who created it?

The whole point is obvious: people keep talking about something that exists in this world, in the seed and flesh of man, and yet they don't want to address who created it. They want to say it exists, but not who created it and who put it in the flesh of man.

Is there something that exists of it's own power and makes itself a home in the flesh, without Christ having anything to do with it?

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Until they acknowledge nothing exists in this world, whether spirit or nature, without Christ creating and making it, then it is all theoretical imagination only.

They say it exists, and so they must have a creator for it. Otherwise, something can exist in this life, that Christ had nothing to do with: He is not the Creator and Maker of all things, because something else exists without Him making it.

Christ is the Creator and Maker of all spiritual and natural things, whether atoms, molecules, DNA, and tissues of flesh.

That's a Scriptural duh.

So you don't have any info on it being placed into man.

Define what in the likeness of sinful flesh means that Scripture mentions?

 

[robert derrick]

So you don't have any info on it being placed into man.

Define what in the likeness of sinful flesh means that Scripture mentions?

Once again, another argument for a sin nature in the flesh.

This thread is about who created it, and who put it into man's seed to pass it on to sin corrupted offspring.

It's nothing personal, but I want thread integrity, because I want someone to answer the simple question at hand: who created it and made it in the seed of man, which was not created by Christ nor made in the seed of man at the first.

Is man a maker of his own seed and flesh?

Is the devil really a god that creates and makes his own nature in that of man?

This is why no one is answering the question, because nothing is created nor made without Christ, and so if there is a sin nature now created and made in the seed of man, it is done by Christ.

And so God is the tempter for man to sin afterall, just as the devil has accused Him of being:

Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.

That is what every teacher of a created sin nature made in the seed of man is accusing Christ of doing, because He is the only Creator and Maker who has power to do it.

 

[BeyondET]

Once again, another argument for a sin nature in the flesh.

This thread is about who created it, and who put it into man's seed to pass it on to sin corrupted offspring.

It's nothing personal, but I want thread integrity, because I want someone to answer the simple question at hand: who created it and made it in the seed of man, which was not created by Christ nor made in the seed of man at the first.

Is man a maker of his own seed and flesh?

Is the devil really a god that creates and makes his own nature in that of man?

This is why no one is answering the question, because nothing is created nor made without Christ, and so if there is a sin nature now created and made in the seed of man, it is done by Christ.

And so God is the tempter for man to sin afterall, just as the devil has accused Him of being:

Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.

That is what every teacher of a created sin nature made in the seed of man is accusing Christ of doing, because He is the only Creator and Maker who has power to do it.

Your avoiding the scripture verse like a plague

Again what does this verse mean? What is your interpretation

Romans 8:3
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

Your not going to get a answer that no one believes sin flesh was placed into man. There is only a couple of translations that even use the word nature don't you do any homework?

Nature is not the proper translation anyhow, you based a thread topic on improper translations.

 

[robert derrick]

Your not going to get a answer that no one believes sin flesh was placed into man. There is only a couple of translations that even use the word nature don't you do any homework?

I don't get an answer because there is no answer for it.

And so far, since the thread challenge will not be answered, then I am willing to go down the endless road of Scripture by Scripture interpretation, which will always be different between you and I, since you already believe in a sin nature in flesh, and I don't. But, I will only do so with you by a strict point by point discipline.

I will respond to a question from you specifically. You then can respond to mine.

God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.

You would say this Scripture means the flesh of man is now sin-filled and full of sin.

I say Jesus coming in the flesh of man, means He therefore came in the likeness of sinful men in flesh, or in the likeness of flesh of sinful men.

Homoiomati sarkos hamartias

Since all men have sinned in the flesh, all men were sinful in the flesh. Jesus coming in the flesh made Him therefore in the likeness of sinful men in the flesh, yet without sinning as they did with the flesh.

The naturally good mortal flesh has nothing to do with men sinning or not, since Adam sinned with it, and Jesus did not.

You can address my response as you like, and then respond to this challenge:

Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.

Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel.

Christ has come in the flesh: the same flesh of all men by the seed of David, and of Jacob, and of Abraham, and of Noah, and of Adam.

If this Scripture is saying that flesh is filled with sin, then Jesus' body was also made and born full of sin by the Holy Spirit. He did so from the sin-filled flesh of Mary's womb, wherein was the sinful seed of the man called David.

Are you saying that Christ's flesh was not made of the seed of a man called David? That His flesh was just as full of sin as any other man? Or that the seed of David and his flesh was different from other men, and not filled with sin from Jacob, Abraham, Noah, and Adam?

 

[PinSeeker]

PinSeeker: God warned Adam that he would fall into this state in the very day he partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and die he did...​

And so it is today. The soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Yeah, I... know "so it is today," Robert. That's why I said it. I'm glad you agree. My goodness. Get over yourself, dude.

I'm not a federalist. Neither is Christ. That's man's theosophy.

Adam represented the entire human race to come; he was its ~ our ~ progenitor. You can call it what you want or not; it is what it is. Adam was the federal head of the human race, meaning that he represented us in a way somewhat ~ somewhat, Robert, not "exactly," but somewhat ~ analogous to how elected representatives in a federal republic like the United States represent the people. In biblical federalism, not only do we bear the consequences of the representatives God chose for us, but we are also regarded as having done what our representative did. This is exactly what Paul says in Romans 5:12...

"...just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned..."​

So yes, Adam was our representative, just as ~ later on in history ~ Jesus was our representative. Succeeding where our first representative failed, Jesus lived a perfect life on our behalf and took the punishment for sin on our behalf. So, if we’re united to Christ by faith, God counts us as perfectly righteous because our representative, Jesus Christ, is perfectly righteous. Even further ~ and this is particularly what you need to hear ~ Christ's obedience becomes our obedience. This in no way lessens in any way or removes our responsibility... [perish the thought] ...to obey the Lord in everything, but Christ's righteousness is credited to us ~ just as it was to Abraham ~ because we believe God.

Your refusal to get this, Robert, does not make it not so.

What you are apparently not understanding is the Scripture of John 1:3, that nothing spiritual nor natural exists in heaven and earth, whether in the stars of heaven or flesh of living creatures on earth, without Christ creating and making it. Nothing exists that is not created and made by Christ.

Robert. In the first chapter of his gospel, John is harkening back to Genesis 1. We are talking about the creation of material (physical) things, here, my friend. So what you say here is non sequitur, really. It is true, of course, that, as John says, "all things were made through Christ, and without Christ nothing was made that was made." But what's being spoken of is God's creation of all physical things, both in Genesis 1 and John 1. Yes, I would wholeheartedly agree that because God did it, it was certainly a spiritual thing that He did, but still, both Moses in Genesis 1-2 (especially Genesis 2, because it zooms in on the creation of man, Adam from dust and Eve from Adam's rib) and John in John 1:3 are talking about everything physical.

You are speaking something that exists that has entered into the seed and flesh of man...

No, actually the opposite; I'm speaking of something that died from Adam, that he lost ~ Adam died, just as God said he would, and you agree on this based on what you just said, Robert ~ and is thus true from birth for all of his progeny. We are without life, dead in our sin.

And so, back to square 1: Who created and made this powerful sin nature, that exists in the seed and flesh of man, so that it is passed on to babes in the womb?

No, that's actually square zero; a non-starter. Again, as I said immediately above, something died in Adam. Adam died, just as God said he would, and is thus true ~ from birth ~ of all of his progeny; we are without life, dead in our sin. What I'm speaking of was not somehow "created." The true image of God, in which Adam was created, was spoiled ~ not fully removed, but horribly spoiled, and this was of Adam, not of God ~ in Adam and Eve when he and Eve fell from grace.

It was not created and made by Christ in the beginning of man's seed and flesh. It did not exist. You are saying it now exists, but without a creator. That is rejecting John 1:3, and declaring that something exists, has been created and made, but not with Christ doing so: there must therefore be another creator and maker of something that exists in the flesh of man.

Again: total non sequitur.

Oh, and God bless you too. I've become a much nicer person, since I've stopped endlessly debating the same old poor horse with the same person.

I see, so, "God bless you, you blankety-blankety-blank..."

Grace and peace to you.

 

[ScottA]

True. When any soul sins today, that soul still dies, even as the first man when he sinned.

The question is who created a sin nature born in man from birth to choose evil rather than good?

All flesh is made naturally and mortal, neither with sin nor righteous nature, just naturally mortal.

And the soul and spirit of man was not made with sin, and if man is now made with sin, who is doing so?

Who brought this sin nature, calling, or spirit into the mind or flesh of man after man sinned? Who made the changing to Christ's creation?

So...you believe that all souls "today" are born in the garden with God just as Adam was and are then driven out by God when they sin? Do you not see that, that is what you are claiming by saying that all mankind was created with a choice of whether to sin or not?

Apparently not.

But you have not thought it through--as I said, "you missed it." God indeed created the circumstances and terms of this world: Everything and everyone dies--naturally--by nature of those terms.

 

[BeyondET]

I don't get an answer because there is no answer for it.

And so far, since the thread challenge will not be answered, then I am willing to go down the endless road of Scripture by Scripture interpretation, which will always be different between you and I, since you already believe in a sin nature in flesh, and I don't. But, I will only do so with you by a strict point by point discipline.

I will respond to a question from you specifically. You then can respond to mine.

God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.

You would say this Scripture means the flesh of man is now sin-filled and full of sin.

I say Jesus coming in the flesh of man, means He therefore came in the likeness of sinful men in flesh, or in the likeness of flesh of sinful men.

Homoiomati sarkos hamartias

Since all men have sinned in the flesh, all men were sinful in the flesh. Jesus coming in the flesh made Him therefore in the likeness of sinful men in the flesh, yet without sinning as they did with the flesh.

The naturally good mortal flesh has nothing to do with men sinning or not, since Adam sinned with it, and Jesus did not.

You can address my response as you like, and then respond to this challenge:

Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.

Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel.

Christ has come in the flesh: the same flesh of all men by the seed of David, and of Jacob, and of Abraham, and of Noah, and of Adam.

If this Scripture is saying that flesh is filled with sin, then Jesus' body was also made and born full of sin by the Holy Spirit. He did so from the sin-filled flesh of Mary's womb, wherein was the sinful seed of the man called David.

Are you saying that Christ's flesh was not made of the seed of a man called David? That His flesh was just as full of sin as any other man? Or that the seed of David and his flesh was different from other men, and not filled with sin from Jacob, Abraham, Noah, and Adam?

Ok buddy

 

[Blue Dragonfly's]

I don't get an answer because there is no answer for it.

And so far, since the thread challenge will not be answered, then I am willing to go down the endless road of Scripture by Scripture interpretation, which will always be different between you and I, since you already believe in a sin nature in flesh, and I don't. But, I will only do so with you by a strict point by point discipline.

I will respond to a question from you specifically. You then can respond to mine.

God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.

You would say this Scripture means the flesh of man is now sin-filled and full of sin.

I say Jesus coming in the flesh of man, means He therefore came in the likeness of sinful men in flesh, or in the likeness of flesh of sinful men.

Homoiomati sarkos hamartias

Since all men have sinned in the flesh, all men were sinful in the flesh. Jesus coming in the flesh made Him therefore in the likeness of sinful men in the flesh, yet without sinning as they did with the flesh.

The naturally good mortal flesh has nothing to do with men sinning or not, since Adam sinned with it, and Jesus did not.

You can address my response as you like, and then respond to this challenge:

Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.

Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel.

Christ has come in the flesh: the same flesh of all men by the seed of David, and of Jacob, and of Abraham, and of Noah, and of Adam.

If this Scripture is saying that flesh is filled with sin, then Jesus' body was also made and born full of sin by the Holy Spirit. He did so from the sin-filled flesh of Mary's womb, wherein was the sinful seed of the man called David.

Are you saying that Christ's flesh was not made of the seed of a man called David? That His flesh was just as full of sin as any other man? Or that the seed of David and his flesh was different from other men, and not filled with sin from Jacob, Abraham, Noah, and Adam?

Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh. He appeared to be a man. He was not like us able to sin because of a ''sinful nature''.

Hebrews 1:3 And He is the radiance of His[God's] glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power.

Insisting Immanuel -Jesus had a sin nature is not just a lie, it is blasphemy against God's holy spirit.

Christians don't blaspheme the holy spirit because we know what that portends.
Those who don't know, or care, do. And that is why they are not one with us.

It really is as simple as that.

 

[PinSeeker]

The problem I have with the idea that we are born with a sin nature, is that it gives us an excuse to sin.

No, it gives us a valid reason for why we cannot, in this life, keep from sinning. In no way do we have any excuse, as Paul is very clear of in Romans 1 and 2.

I do think I can choose not to sin...

Absolutely, but none of us are capable in this life of completely avoiding sin. Sinlessness is not attainable because of our fallen nature. But we are exhorted over and over and over again to refrain from sinning.

...and I do think that when we sin, it creates in us a desire to sin more.

That can certainly happen, yes. But if we have been born again of the Spirit, the Spirit convicts us of our sin and leads us to confession and repentance and cultivates in us a desire not to sin. And we can look forward to the day when there will be no more sin.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Blue Dragonfly's]

No,we still sin. The difference between them and now is our sin pricks our conscience, and we repent,feel that guilt.
The other difference is, when we sin we are not condemned as we once were for it.

 

[PinSeeker]

Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh. He appeared to be a man. He was not like us able to sin because of a ''sinful nature''.

Hebrews 1:3 And He is the radiance of His[God's] glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power.

As the Son of God ~ as God ~ He possessed the full nature of God. But as man, even the Son of Man, He possessed the full nature of man, also. He must have had this human nature, because He was tempted in every way we are (Hebrews 4). If He did not have this sinful nature of man, it would not have been possible for Him to be tempted. But since Jesus was God and in possession of the full nature of God, He was able to overcome ~ perfectly ~ His human, sinful nature.

Insisting Immanuel -Jesus had a sin nature is not just a lie, it is blasphemy against God's holy spirit.

No, it's not. You just have to be able to see the dual nature in Jesus during His walk on earth 2000+ years ago, and then His power as God to overcome the sinful nature of man.

We read about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, BD, in Mark 3:28-30. Jesus does not specifically define this sin, but the context reveals this transgression as the persistent, knowing, verbal attribution of the work of God to Satan. This is what the scribes who spoke against Jesus were doing; they were so hardened against Him that they continued to associate Him with Satan. It is the persistent, deliberate rejection of the Lord's work that shows itself in a willful attribution of God's actions to Satan himself. Such blasphemy is unforgivable not because the Lord is unwilling to forgive but because a person guilty of such sin has fully and finally hardened his heart against the grace of God.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Blue Dragonfly's]

As the Son of God ~ as God ~ He possessed the full nature of God. But as man, even the Son of Man, He possessed the full nature of man, also. He must have had this human nature, because He was tempted in every way we are (Hebrews 4). If He did not have this sinful nature of man, it would not have been possible for Him to be tempted. But since Jesus was God and in possession of the full nature of God, He was able to overcome ~ perfectly ~ His human, sinful nature.


No, it's not. You just have to be able to see the dual nature in Jesus during His walk on earth 2000+ years ago, and then His power as God to overcome the sinful nature of man.

We read about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, BD, in Mark 3:28-30. Jesus does not specifically define this sin, but the context reveals this transgression as the persistent, knowing, verbal attribution of the work of God to Satan. This is what the scribes who spoke against Jesus were doing; they were so hardened against Him that they continued to associate Him with Satan. It is the persistent, deliberate rejection of the Lord's work that shows itself in a willful attribution of God's actions to Satan himself. Such blasphemy is unforgivable not because the Lord is unwilling to forgive but because a person guilty of such sin has fully and finally hardened his heart against the grace of God.

Grace and peace to you.

So Hebrews 1:3 was false?
Jesus did not have a capacity to sin. Maybe that will make it more clear. He appeared as a man, he was divine.
Insisting Jesus had a sinful nature too is insisting the divine coexists with sin.

Jesus was tempted by that which sought to bring temptation to him.That in no way means Jesus was vulnerable to temptation.
He wasn't.

What you and others who think Jesus had a ''sin nature'' are saying,besides blaspheming his holy spirit, is that Jesus was a sinner.

If he had a sin nature he's like the rest of us, because as you said, he had a human nature. That's how he has a ''sin nature''. So, he's a sinner.

That's a lie too.

Hebrews 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature...

When you and those others claim Jesus nature was to sin, you're condemning God's nature as sinful.

I think you all know that. I also think that's your point, and you don't care. You simply like to cast aspirations against Christ, cladding blasphemy as your Exegesis.

It isn't working.

 

[PinSeeker]

So Hebrews 1:3 was false?

No... No, Hebrews 1:3 was and is not false. :)

Jesus did not have a capacity to sin. Insisting Jesus had a sinful nature too is insisting the divine coexists with sin... Jesus was tempted by that which sought to bring temptation to him.That in no way means Jesus was vulnerable to temptation.

Those are very interesting and compelling statements, Blue Dragonfly. Really, this is just a very difficult thing to wrap one's mind around. One thing is certain and beyond debate. Jesus never committed an act of sin. The sinless life of Jesus is absolutely essential for His capacity to serve as our sacrificial substitute, an atoning death in which He was not dying for His own transgressions but for ours (2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 4:15). I'm sure we will agree on that.

What you and others who think Jesus had a ''sin nature'' are saying, besides blaspheming his holy spirit, is that Jesus was a sinner. If he had a sin nature he's like the rest of us, because as you said, he had a human nature. That's how he has a ''sin nature''. So, he's a sinner.

I (and others who think along the same lines as I do) do not discount ~ at all ~ Jesus's also possessing in full the same deific nature as the Father and the Spirit. You may not be, but you certainly seem to be either discounting that or soft-pedaling it to some degree. You obviously agree that Jesus did possess in full the same deific nature as the Father and the Spirit, but still... That's what seems to be the case.

Hebrews 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature...

And it is, of course, 100% true. But again, I would point out the following relevant Scriptures (not an exhaustive list):

• "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth." (John 1:14)
• "For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit." (Romans 8:3-4)
• "...Christ Jesus... was in the form of God... but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men." (Philippians 2:5-8)

When you and those others claim Jesus nature was to sin, you're condemning God's nature as sinful.

I appreciative of your passionate defense of your position, Blue Dragonfly, and I can see how you would say that, but what you say here is not true. Even if you say it's an unintended consequence of making that claim... but you don't; you say precisely the opposite, that you "think that's (our) point, and (we) don't care," that we "simply like to cast aspirations against Christ, cladding blasphemy as your Exegesis," which is quite a graceless statement and totally ridiculous ...it's just not true. Here's what I'll leave off with the following:

In the one person of Christ are united a true human nature and a true divine nature without confusion, mixture, division, or separation. In other words, when the Son of God, Who from all eternity possessed the divine nature, added to Himself a human nature, each nature retained its own attributes. The divine nature did not become human and the human nature did not become divine. Neither were the natures mixed together such that Christ was a strange human-divine hybrid, neither truly human nor truly divine. No, Christ was and remains the God-man. This is a mystery we cannot fully comprehend, but we must affirm it. Having said this...

• If Christ is not truly human, He cannot atone for our sin, for only a human being can atone for the sin of other human beings.
• If Christ is not truly God, the atonement He offers does not have sufficient value to be applied to all the elect.
• If Christ is not the God-man, there is no salvation.

Grace and peace to you.