How could the Messiah be sinless?

[Joseph77]

I think you are just arguing over what you mean by "interpretation", which must be something different than what most mean. As for the last sentence, when did you become a Calvinist? God may grant me something, but I still decide if I will receive it or not.

last first: if YOU decide if you will receive it or not, then you are not a faithful servant yet.
Yes, "interpretation" in Scripture is entirely different than mankind and the false church has said it is for over a thousand years.
So yes, since I mean what God means in Scripture, with no boasting about that as God Reveals that to little children gladly and freely, then what God means is totally different than what most men mean everywhere, for many centuries.

Since the calvin teachings are not a way to be saved, for you to even think I could be a calvinist means , I guess, that you have been mis-directed by someone, as indicated by your last sentence in the quote already noted.

 

[Renniks]

If anyone thinks (even if an Apostle ) that they can figure it out or accomplish it themselves, they have already failed.

Accomplish what?
8 Keep this Book of the Law always on your lips; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.
Sounds like accomplishing things takes a certain amount of dedication.

re you a modalist? Interesting? Jesus is not the Father, and many were called lord, pleeeese?

He's not just called Lord, He's called "mighty God." To call a mere human "Mighty God" is to blaspheme Yahweh.

 

[DNB]

Um, not. That would mean Christ created himself. If he's over all created things and before all created things, he obviously was not among what was created.

No, it's what God bestowed upon him. It is stated that Christ being seated at God's right-hand was a sign of approval and reward for Christ, not an inherent obligation. Again, all the verses that define Christ's hierarchy are not speaking in manner that he is God, or intrinsically has this authority. It pleased God to exalt him to the secondary position of right-hand man, putting all things under his feet. That is how it is worded and expressed, and meant to be understood. Again, you are missing the profundity of this, and are being exceptionally hyper-literal in your hermeneutics.
'Eat my flesh and drink my blood', does not endorse transubstantiation, despite the stark literal meaning. 'Cut off your arm if it offends you', does not mean literally to sever body parts due to sin.

 

[Renniks]

last first: if YOU decide if you will receive it or not, then you are not a faithful servant yet.

Um, so? No one is a perfect sinless servant. Jesus was the only sinless Servant.
But back to the point, if anyone here understood the Bible perfectly, they would not have to interpret anything and we would have no forums because there would be nothing to debate about. But here is the real world, we have to use our brains as well as listen with our spirit and we still get things wrong sometimes.

 

[Renniks]

No, it's what God bestowed upon him. It is stated that Christ being seated at God's right-hand was a sign of approval and reward for Christ, not an inherent obligation. Again, all the verses that define Christ's hierarchy are not speaking in manner that he is God, or intrinsically has this authority. It pleased God to exalt him to the secondary position of right-hand man, putting all things under his feet. That is how it is worded and expressed, and meant to be understood. Again, you are missing the profundity of this, and are being exceptionally hyper-literal in your hermeneutics.
'Eat my flesh and drink my blood', does not endorse transubstantiation, despite the stark literal meaning. 'Cut off your arm if it offends you', does not mean literally to sever body parts due to sin.

It's very convenient to make literal passages symbolic, then you can make them say whatever you want. You can actually just pick and choose what parts of the Bible you want to believe that way. Very convenient, but not helpful for finding the truth.
Funny how I missed the part where it says Christ was among those things created. In fact, it doesn't say that at all, because he wasn't.

 

[Joseph77]

Accomplish what?
8 Keep this Book of the Law always on your lips; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.
Sounds like accomplishing things takes a certain amount of dedication.

(I'll have to look to find it again, if it does not turn up sooner than I can find it)

Jesus told the Apostles: after they asked Him with great astonishment at what He had just said :
"How then can we be saved !? " "You can't , if you trust yourselves to accomplish it" .... But if you trust your heavenly Father to accomplish your salvation in this life and in the next, it is already done.

He did not give them the power to determine independently from the Father what the Father's Word or His Own Word means.

He did not tell Simon barjona that he was blessed because he had figured out in any way that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of the Living God, NO!
He told Simon barjona, the Apostle, that he was blessed because it was NOT flesh and blood (not of men/man/) that had shown him that Jesus was Messiah, but THE FATHER IN HEAVEN HAD REVEALED THIS TO HIM. (and likewise anyone else who learned form God) .

As also written somewhere : NOT by might, NOR by power (not by any strength or means of man) ,
BUT BY MY SPIRIT SAYETH THE LORD GOD.

See ? With the carnal mind, men learn to worship the creation (even themselves), AND NOT THE CREATOR.

Only with a renewed by God mind can someone know Him... as He Permits, and as HE Accomplishes this.

It is not by human flesh/ carnal / effort ....

Finally, it is not with a certain amount of dedication , no.... it is with the whole heart devoted to God.... so for instance if someone is of a double mind, not whole-hearted devotion, fully devoted to God (like a little child too, trusting the Father and relying totally on the Father) , they should not think they will receive anything from God, (and that includes any understanding of Scripture) .

 

[Joseph77]

Um, so? No one is a perfect sinless servant. Jesus was the only sinless Servant.
But back to the point, if anyone here understood the Bible perfectly, they would not have to interpret anything and we would have no forums because there would be nothing to debate about. But here is the real world, we have to use our brains as well as listen with our spirit and we still get things wrong sometimes.

If you reserve it to yourself to decide what to accept from God and what to reject from God, then you do not belong to Him.

 

[Joseph77]

But back to the point, if anyone here understood the Bible perfectly, they would not have to interpret anything and we would have no forums because there would be nothing to debate about.

You and others can go on like the catholics have done for over a thousand years 'interpreting' the Bible, and being led astray,
or
you can listen , and listen, and keep listening, (seeking Him with your whole heart) until you hear the voice of Jesus, the Shepherd, and follow Him EVERYPLACE HE GOES. This is what HE says His Sheep do.

 

[DNB]

It's very convenient to make literal passages symbolic, then you can make them say whatever you want. You can actually just pick and choose what parts of the Bible you want to believe that way. Very convenient, but not helpful for finding the truth.
Funny how I missed the part where it says Christ was among those things created. In fact, it doesn't say that at all, because he wasn't.

The art of exegesis is just that, knowing what literary convention is being used in a particular pericope. Are not a lot of Jesus' sayings parabolic, or figurative? Of course, the Bible and himself has said it very clearly. His disciples asked him, why do you continuously speak in parables...

Yes, it is funny how you missed the part of the Jesus' birth, and his growing up in Nazareth and speaking at the temple at a young age, and how he grew in favour with God and man. Or that he ate food, defecated, and also died on a cross from suffocation. Very odd that you missed these creaturely attributes? Is your Bible missing pages?

 

[Renniks]

Yes, it is funny how you missed the part of the Jesus' birth, and his growing up in Nazareth and speaking at the temple at a young age, and how he grew in favour with God and man. Or that he ate food, defecated, and also died on a cross from suffocation. Very odd that you missed these creaturely attributes?

I didn't miss any of that. I find it amazing that God would lower himself to become like us in order to save us. God did this, not a mere mortal man.

 

[Renniks]

If you reserve it to yourself to decide what to accept from God and what to reject from God, then you do not belong to Him.

And yet you do exactly that. Because you too are merely human.

 

[DNB]

I didn't miss any of that. I find it amazing that God would lower himself to become like us in order to save us. God did this, not a mere mortal man.

My contention is that, for one, God cannot become human for he is transcendent, immortal and incorruptible. Did God really go of into the woods to defecate and urinate? And two, there is no necessity, glory or soundness in such an absurd notion of God propitiating Himself, or raising Himself from the dead. This is the crux of the issue, the nonsensical and inefficacious results of such an act, ...especially when the Bible says otherwise about the Atonement, too.

I find it amazing simply that God offered a means for redemption, considering how wicked that we all are. Plus, I find it amazing all the love and honour that he poured upon his son, a creature, giving him the authority of a god. That is unequivocal love! And not, having God seated beside himself in heaven, how utterly retarded!

 

[justbyfaith]

Are you a modalist? Interesting? Jesus is not the Father, and many were called lord, pleeeese?

1 Peter 3:6 like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.
'The Lord said to my lord', shows that there are two different lords. There are many lords, within many contexts.

This is a sidestep from the real of the issue which is that there is one Lord (Ephesians 4:5, 1 Corinthians 8:6) and that this Lord is the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21). And that no one can say that Jesus is "the" Lord except by the Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 12:3 (kjv)). And that Jesus is the Lord (1 Corinthians 8:6).

My response to you is this.

That whether the word Lord is capitalized or not is an inspired part of what holy scripture teaches.

Consider:

1Co 8:5, For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
1Co 8:6, But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Consider that if the capitalizations don't matter here, there is a contradiction.

Either there are many Lords, and one Lord Jesus Christ; or, there are many lords, and one lord Jesus Christ.

Only when you capitalize Lord as it refers to Jesus Christ and uncapitalize it when it refers to other lords, does it make any sense.

And when you realize that there are many lords; but only one Lord: everything falls into place.

And most assuredly you realize that the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21) is not "a lord".

The Father, according to those scriptures, is "the Lord" of heaven and earth.

 

[CharismaticLady]

The Bible clearly says that every human will sin someday:

There is no human who does not sin. (1 Kings 8:46)

But then how could the Messiah be sinless?

I would say that the spirit in the Messiah was not a human spirit but the spirit of God. The Spirit of God in the flesh, therefore John 1:1 and 14. But then one asks oneself the question, did the incarnation of the Spirit create another person separated from the father? Should one think that God has begotten a real son? That God has begotten a real son sounds illogical to me, since this would then be a second God, but if the Messiah is the Father, one would have to ask oneself why the Bible constantly separates the Son from the Father.

That's easy. It is the same thing for how a Christian becomes sinless. THE SEED OF THE FATHER.

1 John 3:9
9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

Jesus was literally conceived with the seed of God. So, from day one, He couldn't sin. And He has given that power to us who have been baptized with His Spirit.

Romans 8:29-30

Jesus was the firstborn of many brethren like Him.

 

[justbyfaith]

That's easy. It is the same thing for how a Christian becomes sinless. THE SEED OF THE FATHER.

1 John 3:9
9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

Jesus was literally conceived with the seed of God. So, from day one, He couldn't sin. And He has given that power to us who have been baptized with His Spirit.

Romans 8:29-30

Jesus was the firstborn of many brethren like Him.

Of course, it is also true that even as believers we all have indwelling sin (1 John 1:8, Galatians 3:22, Romans 3:22, 1 Timothy 1:15, etc.)

 

[Joseph77]

And yet you do exactly that. Because you too are merely human.

No - you made a choice to reserve to yourself whether to accept God's Word or not, each time, so to speak.

I made a choice to always accept His Word, no matter what , forever, and always to do as He Says, (yes, by His Accomplishment of this - even the desire to seek Him is a gift from Him) , no matter the cost.

My will is totally surrended and willingly always doing as He says....

You have said apparently that you retain your will independent of Him, and have not submitted to Him to be as He says always.

Your will is not submitted.

Mine is.

This is a choice TODAY - IF YOU WILL HEAR HIS VOICE, (or if you do hear His Voice ? ) , do not rebel like they did in the wilderness....
TODAY - CHOOSE who you will serve, choose now, once for all time, forever, who you will serve...

 

[Joseph77]

And yet you do exactly that. Because you too are merely human.

I was once a with all the sons of disobedience subject to the prince of the power of the air, as written. Ephesians 2.

But now, by the Plan, and the Purpose, and the Grace of God in Christ Jesus, I am a New Creation in Him, fully His, purchased by His Blood, and nothing do I claim is mine own any more..... all is His. (same as in ACTS in the first assembly of Ekklesia)

 

[DNB]

This is a sidestep from the real of the issue which is that there is one Lord (Ephesians 4:5, 1 Corinthians 8:6) and that this Lord is the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21). And that no one can say that Jesus is "the" Lord except by the Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 12:3 (kjv)). And that Jesus is the Lord (1 Corinthians 8:6).

My response to you is this.

That whether the word Lord is capitalized or not is an inspired part of what holy scripture teaches.

Consider:

1Co 8:5, For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
1Co 8:6, But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Consider that if the capitalizations don't matter here, there is a contradiction.

Either there are many Lords, and one Lord Jesus Christ; or, there are many lords, and one lord Jesus Christ.

Only when you capitalize Lord as it refers to Jesus Christ and uncapitalize it when it refers to other lords, does it make any sense.

And when you realize that there are many lords; but only one Lord: everything falls into place.

And most assuredly you realize that the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21) is not "a lord".

The Father, according to those scriptures, is "the Lord" of heaven and earth.

C'mon JBF, the passage is clearly indicating two different entities. Not to mention, one is called God, the other Lord (i can't believe that you even used this verse). That type of language is not used to express the same being. No one expresses the incomprehensible in such a manner. These men ate and drank with Jesus, even went to the latrine together. No one will ever call Jesus God in such a matter-of-fact, or unqualified means. The expression clearly delineates two separate entities. Lordship is contextual. Kings were prostrated to, as David was worshipped, as Bathsheba prostrated herself before Solomon (even her son). Don't get hung-up on etymology, context overrides any type of translation, ambiguity or subjectivity. THe context of the passage is meant to define our two lords, God the Father, and Jesus King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.

 

[Tong2020]

Yes, but first, we are all in the image of God, but Christ perfected it through love and obedience towards the Father (meaningless if he is God).

I would just like to comment on this. When Adam sinned, man lost the image of God, for God is a holy God. If mankind are still in the image of God, and Jesus Christ (the Son) is the image of God, every man then is said to be in the image of the Son, Jesus Christ. And that of course is not the truth.

Now, let me go comment on your point below.

And secondly, the verse does not say that he is eternal, all the terminology and expressions are referring to created things. The author of the epistle is referring to God's divine plan, that Christ would be reason and purpose behind all creation. He did not create him first, but all things were created for him. This is how the verse is expressed. This is not the wording used to express that a man is God.

To the contrary, the passage speaks of the preeminence of Jesus Christ over all creation. In the language of man, that is to say, He is the firstborn over all creation.

In the verse, the Greek word that was translated in the English "firstborn" is "prototokos" which literally means first to be born, as being the eldest. But of course, when scriptures there said of Jesus Christ as the "firstborn over all creation", that obviously could not be literal, but is figurative language.

This is very profound Renniks, you are taking a great mystery of God, in how He played out history by saving His best and premier creature for last, and turning into a ridiculous god-man theory, that can never reconcile in wisdom and glory to God.
Again, God saved the best for last, this is what the NT authors are trying to convey with these expressions. Don't get mystical and inexplicable in your theology. The Jews and Muslims are laughing at the Christians (trinitarians), be cause they can't even explain or understand what they're trying to profess to others.

Not only do they (as others also do) perhaps laugh at the trinity nature of God, but first laughed at the message of the cross that is preached. Do you laugh with them? I hope not. For here's what scriptures says concerning those who laugh at the message and preaching of the apostles concerning the Messiah, the Anointed One.

1 Corinthians 1:18
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

1 Corinthians 1:23
but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness,

By the way, do you know the message of the cross? If so, please go ahead and tell us what you say it is. And what do you think is the reason they see the message of the cross to be foolishness?

Tong
R0811

 

[CharismaticLady]

Of course, it is also true that even as believers we all have indwelling sin (1 John 1:8, Galatians 3:22, Romans 3:22, 1 Timothy 1:15, etc.)

I see you are speaking for yourself. I've been born again, so I'll believe and live the Word of God that is about born again Christians, 1 John 3:9, and not those who say they have a relationship with God, but who have never repented, so have no power over sin as in 1 John 1:6, 8 and 10.