Why Do We Sin?

[101G]

Interesting. Never heard Jesus being unable to sin before. Idk what to think about that. But to be tempted by something, I would say a sin has to be involved for Him to be tempted with. He may not have had a sin nature, but He had free will.

a temptation do not necessary involve a sin, but it can cause one to sin. see, temptation is only a test. God can be TEMPTED, or TESTED for RIGHTEOUSNESS, but he never TEMPT anyone with Evil, only for righteousness.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[April_Rose]

Jesus was born of a virgin. This was necessary, so that He would not have a sin nature.

What about the fact that Mary herself was a sinner though and He was inside her womb just like any other baby would have been.

Great questions April. ( In our m native language your name is Apirera.. love the name, very pretty.)
Yes, Jesus could have sinned. He was human. Born with all the human capacities for rebellion... But He demonstrated by His faith in the Father that He could live a life of obedience and service. And so can we. In the same manner. Through faith and by connection with God through His Spirit.
KJV 2 Peter 1:2-4
2 Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,
3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

First of all thank you very much for your compliment. Second of all I think the video I posted on the last page explains this very well. Jesus as a human being was very capable of sinning since He had the brain to decide whether or not He wanted to do right or wrong. However, since He was also God He had no desire to and was incredibly holy. So He could sin anytime He wanted to He just didn't have the desire to as it sums up.

Well possibly because i His twisted mind He thought He could get Jesus to sin. bible doesn't say so the best I can give you is an educated guess.

The Bible also doesn't say whether or not He was capable of sinning though just that He didn't.

 

[101G]

What about the fact that Mary herself was a sinner though and He was inside her womb just like any other baby would have been.

we are of our father's, and by our mothers, 1 Corinthians 11:12 "For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God."

now, the natural flesh body that our Lord Jesus came in, was it not of God? scripture, Luke 1:35 "And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."

now, one other thing, was it not the Holy Ghost who is the REAL title holder "FATHER?", lets see, Matthew 1:19 "Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily."
Matthew 1:20 "But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost."
now, if 101G conceive a child in a woman is he, (101G), the father of the child?, or amadeus?, I'm sure he don't mind me using his name.

so who is the REAL "FATHER?", the Holy Ghost, or???????, remember it was the Holy Ghost who conceived the child in Mary's womb, who she, Mary, is only the surrogate mother. so who is the real father of that child?

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[friend of]

I believe the bible states God cannot be tempted (to sin). It is completely antithetical to His nature. There is no enticement to His being. He utterly abhors it. Thus why Christ never sinned.

 

[April_Rose]

I believe the bible states God cannot be tempted (to sin). It is completely antithetical to His nature. There is no enticement to His being. He utterly abhors it. Thus why Christ never sinned.

Again. Satan did try and tempt Jesus and even though he's evil he isn't stupid. He probably wouldn't have tried if He couldn't be and Satan would probably know that already.

 

[Brakelite]

I believe the bible states God cannot be tempted (to sin). It is completely antithetical to His nature. There is no enticement to His being. He utterly abhors it. Thus why Christ never sinned.

Jesus was the Son of God. And He was just as human as you and I. It was through His connection to divinity that He was able to withstand temptation. It is NOT antithetical to anyone's nature to be tempted... It is antithetical to God's nature to consider surrendering to that temptation. To be tempted is not sin. Sin comes in the acceptance of the invitation.

 

[Brakelite]

And Satan knew full well Who Jesus was. He would have heard God's voice at the baptism. "This is My Son". Those temptations were in part designed with a purpose... Remember the words, "more subtle than any..."...
A. To doubt His own identity. "If thou be..." Jesus was born without any knowledge or understanding of Who He was... This was something He had to learn as He grew up, from scripture, and faith. From His mother also who would have testified of the message of the angels at Bethlehem.
B. To use His great power to prove to Himself Who He was. Such would have been selfish... Sin.
C. To prove to others Who He was. That would have been pride, ego, He was tempted to take by His own power what was promised by the Father., A kingdom. .. Self again.

If Christ had sinned or doubted our salvation would have been lost... And so would Christ.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Firstly, the English word "tempt", does not always have the meaning of "tempting to sin". Like the actual meaning of the Greek verb πειράζω, it literally means, "to test, put to the test, to try", with the hope that the person "tested", might, not will, succumb. This I believe should be the meaning used in the Lord's Prayer, "lead us not into testing", and not "temptation", which gives the false impression, that as if God does do so, and we are petitioning Him not to.

Secondly, for Jesus Christ to have been able to have sinned, He would have had to have a "fallen" human nature, which would have been "capable" of sinning. We know from Scripture, that even from the womb of Mary, Jesus Christ is called "Holy" (Luke 1:35), where the Greek ἅγιος, here has the meaning, "pure, sinless, holy". In Romans 8:3, Paul writes, "κατεκρινεν την αμαρτιαν εν τη σαρκι", that is, "He condemned sin in the flesh". The phrase depends on "κατεκρινεν". Had Paul written, "την εν τη σαρκι", then Paul would have affirmed that there was sin in the human nature of Jesus. But this construction shows beyond any doubt, that Jesus Christ, as the God-Man, even from His conception in the womb of Mary, was "sinless, pure and holy". Which is why Paul says very clearly in Philippians 2:7, of the post-Incarnate Christ, that He was "being made in the likeness of men". Here the Greek ὁμοίωμα, denotes that He "resembled" humans, not that His human nature was not real, but that, as He alone was "sinless" in His human nature, that this "separated Him from sinners" (Hebrews 7:26). This verse in Hebrews 7 is very important in the study of the Person of Jesus Christ.

"For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens"

"Holy" we have already seen. "harmless", is, ἄκακος, that is, "innocent, free from guilt". "undefiled", ἀμίαντος, "free from the stain of ungodliness, without any contamination". The great detail that is used for the Person of the Lord Jesus' human nature, is very important, lest any even suppose that in Him is ANY sin, or capability of sin.

Thirdly, The Second Person of the Godhead, the Lord Jesus Christ, from eternity past, IS Almighty God. He did NOT lay aside His Deity when He "became Man", but "took upon Himself" the "very nature" of humans, apart from any sinfulness. Jesus Christ, as His Incarnation, became the God-Man, that is, 100% God and 100% Man, both perfect natures in One Person. As "God manifested in the flesh" (1 Timothy 3:16), "God cannot be tempted with evil" (James 1:13). That is, it is not possible to "tempt God to evil", this is against His Holy Nature, they very same "nature" that IS always present in the Lord Jesus Christ. As we have seen, the human "nature" of Jesus Christ, even from conception in Mary, is completely PERFECT in every way, not only "sinless", but also "incapable of sin", by the very fact that Jesus Christ is ever the Almighty God.

Fourthly, to even suggest that Jesus Christ, the God-Man, was "capable of sinning", but chose not to, is very dangerous, and I believe something that the devil has got Christians, not only discussing, but also believing. This is nothing less than a direct attack on the very Person of the Lord Jesus Christ, with the absurd notion that somehow, a Perfect Person, can be "tempted to do evil". Exactly how this is even remotely possibe, is beyond me. Since Jesus Christ is 100% Perfect in His entire Person, HOW could He ever "given into temptation to sin"?

Christians should be very careful not to try to understand things that they are strictly not allowed to. It is like us faillible humans, trying to understand the origin of sin, where did this come from. This is a no-go doctrine for any Christian, as probing into such, wil no doubt cause you to fall into the trap of the devil.

 

[friend of]

Shouldn't we as Christians long to be tested.? Testing is something that is good for us I think. It both proves and strengthens our faith

 

[Nancy]

It's one of those mysteries surrounding Jesus.
Jesus is fully man and fully God at the same time.
But basically the "man" in Jesus was tempted. Man is corrupt. (Deceitful heart)

But Jesus overcame the temptations.
And did a "smackdown" on Satan.

I think is was because Satan was trying to tempt Jesus human part. It's kind of like when John TB baptized Jesus and Jesus said to him when he objected: 'let it be so for now to fulfill righteousness' (so, baptism is righteous! ) We are to follow His example in every way we are given the ability to do so. And, temptation is a biggie.
Philippians 2:7 says He "emptied Himself" but...does not say of what. I don't think it was ever His divinity though.

We still have a sin nature inside us, like a parasite that we need to kill off more and more. Jesus was perfect which equals God to me. ONLY God could die for our sins, not a mere human!
Okay, I'm done rambling

 

[JohnDB]

I think is was because Satan was trying to tempt Jesus human part. It's kind of like when John TB baptized Jesus and Jesus said to him when he objected: 'let it be so for now to fulfill righteousness' (so, baptism is righteous! ) We are to follow His example in every way we are given the ability to do so. And, temptation is a biggie.
Philippians 2:7 says He "emptied Himself" but...does not say of what. I don't think it was ever His divinity though.

We still have a sin nature inside us, like a parasite that we need to kill off more and more. Jesus was perfect which equals God to me. ONLY God could die for our sins, not a mere human!
Okay, I'm done rambling

One of the New Testament writers said something about Jesus being a second Adam...
Just something else to put in your back teeth.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Jesus could not sin, else He would not have been God.

We sin because we are sinners by nature. it is our natural "bent" to sin.

Then you don't believe that the Only Begotten Son of God came in the likeness of the first man Adam who was created without spots and blemishes, he was sinless until he disobeyed God. God sent his Only Begotten Son of God in the likeness of the first man Adam. Jesus was not born in sin as we are and he remained sinless right on up to his death. Jesus chose to be a person who loved his heavenly father so much that he chose not to disobey God's commands but instead he chose to be obedient

 

[Mayflower]

What about the fact that Mary herself was a sinner though and He was inside her womb just like any other baby would have

Well God didn't have sex with with Mary. She was like a surrogate if that makes sense. Mary was Jesus earthly mother, but Jesus wasn't Mary's egg or Joseph's sperm from how I understand. He just came from Mary's womb. This is is why a virgin birth was important.

 

[April_Rose]

Well God didn't have sex with with Mary. She was like a surrogate if that makes sense. Mary was Jesus earthly mother, but Jesus wasn't Mary's egg or Joseph's sperm from how I understand. He just came from Mary's womb. This is is why a virgin birth was important.

That part makes sense, but wouldn't He have part of her DNA? Speaking of which I know it's a little off topic but I'm sort of curious to know what His DNA looked like since He was God as well as human.

 

[Mayflower]

That part makes sense, but wouldn't He have part of her DNA? Speaking of which I know it's a little off topic but I'm sort of curious to know what His DNA looked like since He was God as well as human.

Mary was just the vessel like a surrogate mom. A sperm and egg is planted in a woman's womb, and the woman goes through pregnancy and delivers for someone who does not have children. The child does not have the surrogate dna at all. Baby just uses the uterus to grow in.

But that is just what I know about surrogacy. I don't know God's ways how this works 0 though. I just know if Jesus is fully God also, God cannot sin. It would go against who He is. That makes perfect sense in my mind now.

I would love to be able to be tempted and unable to sin.

 

[Mayflower]

Actually, this makes a bit of sense of Jesus having some of Mary's dna. I really don't know.

Interesting topic none the less. This opened some questions in my own mind.

Did Jesus have Marys DNA

 

[April_Rose]

So we don't get too off topic, I started a new spinoff thread.




The DNA Of Jesus

 

[DNB]

Fourthly, to even suggest that Jesus Christ, the God-Man, was "capable of sinning", but chose not to, is very dangerous, and I believe something that the devil has got Christians, not only discussing, but also believing. This is nothing less than a direct attack on the very Person of the Lord Jesus Christ, with the absurd notion that somehow, a Perfect Person, can be "tempted to do evil". Exactly how this is even remotely possibe, is beyond me. Since Jesus Christ is 100% Perfect in His entire Person, HOW could He ever "given into temptation to sin"?

You need to be careful in implying that God is so foolish, that He sent Himself as the mediator between Himself and man. You need to consider how dangerous your theology is, when you regard God as being so irrational as to send a being to not sin, who is incapable of sinning, to expose and rectify the sins of a being, who was capable of sinning, namely Adam & Eve.
Christ's self oblation to God was not accepted solely for his obedience, and thus, fulfillment of the Mosaic Law, for perfection also includes the golden rule - loving God with all your heart mind and soul. Perfection is deficient without this disposition. Therefore, Christ's eligibility as the perfect sacrifice was based on his uncompromised love, devotion and obedience to God, something a god-man cannot qualify for, nor God himself, obviously.

You make a mockery of God's judicial system by claiming that he demanded an infallible being, to be infallible, while condemning a fallible being for not being infallible. You ridicule God's wisdom by asserting that He sent Himself, in order to prove His love for Himself.

Your exegesis is entirely imbalanced, you over emphasized your implausible god-man theory, while entirely ignoring, and ultimately undermining, the logistics and rationality behind God's Atonement. You lack a great deal of depth to your understanding, despite your prolific use of etymologies to try and make your point. Have you ever considered applying wisdom to your exegesis?

 

[DNB]

So there's some debate whether or not Jesus could sin and just chose not to or if He was incapable of sinning. I personally believe that He was capable of sinning and just chose not to for two reasons. One,.. if He couldn't sin then why would Satan even bother with trying to tempt Him in the first place and two,.. if He was incapable of sin then I don't think it would have worked for Him being the perfect sacrifice for our sins.

Anyways, so now that I've covered why I think Jesus didn't sin,.. why do we sin? Could we choose to never sin if we really wanted to or is it because that it's in our blood due to the original sin? If the latter part is true how was Jesus born without it when (even though I already know that the Catholics will disagree with me on this but it's not biblical and Mary could have just easily died on the cross for our sins then) Mary was a sinner herself?

Not only, AR, would it be ridiculous on satan's part to try and tempt an infallible being, but it would be equally incompetent on God's part to devise a remedy for the fall of man and the justification behind Adam's condemnation, with a being who it was impossible to fail. And thus, reveal a sincere devotion towards God, that primarily, Adam & Eve failed to do. God's soteriology becomes ludicrous if Christ could not be tempted, making the love and obedience that he showed towards God, for which he was consequently praised and exalted for, utterly meaningless and without any efficacy.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

You need to be careful in implying that God is so foolish, that He sent Himself as the mediator between Himself and man. You need to consider how dangerous your theology is, when you regard God as being so irrational as to send a being to not sin, who is incapable of sinning, to expose and rectify the sins of a being, who was capable of sinning, namely Adam & Eve.
Christ's self oblation to God was not accepted solely for his obedience, and thus, fulfillment of the Mosaic Law, for perfection also includes the golden rule - loving God with all your heart mind and soul. Perfection is deficient without this disposition. Therefore, Christ's eligibility as the perfect sacrifice was based on his uncompromised love, devotion and obedience to God, something a god-man cannot qualify for, nor God himself, obviously.

You make a mockery of God's judicial system by claiming that he demanded an infallible being, to be infallible, while condemning a fallible being for not being infallible. You ridicule God's wisdom by asserting that He sent Himself, in order to prove His love for Himself.

Your exegesis is entirely imbalanced, you over emphasized your implausible god-man theory, while entirely ignoring, and ultimately undermining, the logistics and rationality behind God's Atonement. You lack a great deal of depth to your understanding, despite your prolific use of etymologies to try and make your point. Have you ever considered applying wisdom to your exegesis?

judging from what you write here and elsewhere, it is clear that you don't really know what you are on about!