How did Jesus keep from sinning?

[BarneyFife]

The only reason we think that Jesus was born under the law is because of a comma in our English bible translations.

Wind of doctrine #978,426

This is what has become of the incessant tendency of man to search for a loophole to convince himself that God doesn't mean what He says when He says:

Obey and live;
Disobey and die.

The conditions of eternal life are the same today as they ever have been:

Perfect obedience to the commandments of God

Were it not so, Christ need not have laid aside His inexpressible Glory and immersed Himself in our little pandemic of sin and woe to live as we should live, and die as we should die.

Soteriology is not a chess game—it is the flesh and blood, the very life of the LORD Jesus Christ.


.

 

[BarneyFife]

There you go folks, if you commit a sin you're heading for Hell! According to BBJ.

Yeah, evidently we slip in and out of a "saved" state constantly. I hope I wasn't guilty of any sins of ommission since I last checked. Or would I even know?


.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

There you go folks, if you commit a sin you're heading for Hell! According to BBJ.

WHY wouldn't one not repent and use 1 John 1:9 ?

That way they can take the Jesus exit and get OFF the highway to hell!

 

[amadeus]

Yeah, evidently we slip in and out of a "saved" state constantly. I hope I wasn't guilty of any sins of ommission since I last checked. Or would I even know?


.

Was that not what the children of Israel did in the wilderness? Are we better than they were? Who is closer to God today than they were? Is God a respecter of persons?

 

[Jack]

1 John 1:9-10
9 If WE confess OUR sins, He is faithful and just to forgive US OUR sins and to cleanse US from all unrighteousness.
10 If WE say that WE have not sinned, WE make Him a liar, and His word is not in US.

I'm pretty sure John was a Christian.

 

[Jack]

WHY wouldn't one not repent and use 1 John 1:9 ? View attachment 39865

That way they can take the Jesus exit and get OFF the highway to hell!

Committing a sin does not send a Christian to Hell.

 

[BarneyFife]

Was that not what the children of Israel did in the wilderness? Are we better than they were? Who is closer to God today than they were? Is God a respecter of persons?

And what did God do? Did He not continue to protect all who looked to Him and had not fully turned their backs on Him?

What of Uzzah? Are we to believe he forfeited Heaven for trying to protect the ark from defilement, however rashly his strict duty was forgotten?


.

 

[BarneyFife]

Are we better than they were?

By the way, we certainly are not—only better off. ;)


.

 

[Behold]

I don't see what sort of "Deity of Christ" you teach, having earlier written: "GOD, does not DIE, yet Jesus DIED.. .. on the Cross., and rose again." Therefore, according to you, Jesus was not God Almighty, Jehovah or Yahweh.

You posted one line out my Post, and gave it a spin, and made a wrong conclusion.

Let me tell you a fact. @Arthur81
I can teach the Deity of Christ, and happily will do it,.. but this Forum, as far as i know, ..... = does not allow this..

If they did, i would direct you to 1 John and then John 1:10. As Jesus pre-incarnate is the "word who was GOD" and Jesus as the "word manifested in the flesh", created the world according to John 1:10.

 

[marks]

Not completly. His maternal lineage was earthly, but his paternal lineage was heavenly. This is why God chose a virgin birth—to bypass humanity's sin nature, which is passed down from the seed of man. Now, I don't think that meant he couldn't have rebelled and sinned like Adam, but he made a choice not to.

I don't think Jesus could sin any more than I can fly. It's in our natures. Jesus is God, and is righteous and holy, and that nature did not change. Though He took on a human body, He remained holy and righteous, because that is Who He is.

As I see it . . .

Much love!

 

[Jack]

I don't think Jesus could sin any more than I can fly. It's in our natures. Jesus is God, and is righteous and holy, and that nature did not change. Though He took on a human body, He remained holy and righteous, because that is Who He is.

As I see it . . .

Much love!

Amen bro!!!

 

[BarneyFife]

The Sinner/Saint argument is a paradox that Christians refuse to accept.

There is no excuse for sin of any kind.

But because we know we do so, we neither confirm nor deny it.

Unless we are speaking of it to someone other than ourselves.


.

 

[marks]

1 John 1:9-10
9 If WE confess OUR sins, He is faithful and just to forgive US OUR sins and to cleanse US from all unrighteousness.
10 If WE say that WE have not sinned, WE make Him a liar, and His word is not in US.

I'm pretty sure John was a Christian.

1 John 1:6 KJV
If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

John used "inclusive" language, saying "we", however, I don't think he was saying here that John himself may have been walking in darkness, lying about having fellowship with God.

Much love!

 

[Jack]

1 John 1:6 KJV
If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

John used "inclusive" language, saying "we", however, I don't think he was saying here that John himself may have been walking in darkness, lying about having fellowship with God.

Much love!

Exactly!!!

 

[BarneyFife]

1 John 1:6 KJV
If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

John used "inclusive" language, saying "we", however, I don't think he was saying here that John himself may have been walking in darkness, lying about having fellowship with God.

Much love!

Then why didn't he say:

"If you say" or "If a man say?"

Is this a fair question?


.

 

[marks]

Then why didn't he say:

"If you say" or "If a man say?"

Is this a fair question?


.

Why didn't you ask, "Then why did he say that?"

Also a fair question?

Isn't it true that we have many ways to say things, and we choose from among them? Our wording reflects our personality and values, and what exactly we are are endeavoring to communicate.

To me the answer is in the description, "inclusive language", this was how he wrote it. Personally I don't have any issues understanding it, and I can verify from his own words, as I did above, that this was his use of the language.

To directly answer your question, I don't know why, only, that this is what he did write. But again, I don't have any issues with that.

Much love!

 

[BarneyFife]

"Then why did he say that?"

I don't know why, only, that this is what he did write. But I don't have any issues with that.

Maybe it wasn't a figure of speech, and he actually meant "we," in the absolute sense.

I'm getting a bit of a flashback here about literal interpretation.


.

 

[marks]

I don't know why, only, that this is what he did write. But I don't have any issues with that.

Maybe it wasn't a figure of speech, and he actually meant "we," in the absolute sense.

I'm getting a bit of a flashback here about literal interpretation.


.

You've got to work with the way he wrote, whomever the writer was. Are you actually thinking John meant that he was saying that he could be one of the liars who did not actually have fellowship with God?

If you don't take into account writing styles and figures of speech and such, you can end up in the weeds.

1 John 1:3 KJV
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

1 John 1:6 KJV
If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

How do you reconcile these?

Is he assuring us that he truly has fellowship with God, and then turns around to say, but maybe I'm lying?

Many passages are written in such a way that they address the one who professes faith without making a statement of whether that faith is true or not, rather, by showing how we can know the difference.

Later in John's letter he'll write that those who leave us were not of us. They claimed faith, but they left, showing their faith false, as one example. He didn't say, You have many false among you, but he did say, those who leave us were not of us.

Paul wrote a lot like that also, allowing people their profession of faith, but giving the signs of true and false faith. I can show you examples if you like.

Much love!

 

[amadeus]

And what did God do? Did He not continue to protect all who looked to Him and had not fully turned their backs on Him?

Even so but How many were killed along the way and how many failed to finally enter the Promised Land of those adults who followed Moses out of Egypt? Only two!
Does this relate to the number who walk God today but who will likewise fail to make it to their Promised Land?

What of Uzzah? Are we to believe he forfeited Heaven for trying to protect the ark from defilement, however rashly his strict duty was forgotten?

I won't judge him nor all of those who died in the wilderness. Who am I to judge?

 

[amadeus]

By the way, we certainly are not—only better off. ;)


.

Better off? Does the following standard of God spoken by Jesus apply equally to all men according to God who according to OT and NT verses is no respecter of persons?

Lu 12:48

But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.